Open forum Sept 17-23

Published:

 

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply. To participate, login with your Columbian.com ID or register for an account at Columbian.com.

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Editor John Hill -- john.hill@columbian.com.


364 comments

Comments

some interesting listening...

Peter Ditto - Morals, Facts, and Libertarians: New Developments in the Science of Ideology

http://www.pointofinquiry.org/peter_ditto_morals_facts_and_libertarians/

mr_basil_seal — September 17, 2012 at 7:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


#The Government Saves Us from Poverty Because That Is What Government Does

by Paul Constant

Eli and I have both written about yesterday's announcement that the number of Americans living in poverty remained the same last year, after three straight years of increases. Interesting numbers continue to come from this report, and I think this part is especially relevant to the presidential election:

Federal lifeline programs have helped keep millions out of poverty, U.S. Census data shows. Social Security payments lifted 21.4 million people — including 14.5 million senior citizens — over the poverty line in 2011, while unemployment benefits prevented 2.3 million Americans from falling into poverty.

This stuff matters. If Paul Ryan had his way during the Bush Administration, Social Security would be invested in the stock market, and who knows if those 21 million Americans would have the same benefits they have now? Romney and Ryan both want to slash entitlement programs that save people from living in poverty. They don't understand that this is what government does. It's arguably the most important thing that government does; it saves people and gives them a second chance.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/09/13/the-government-saves-us-from-poverty-because-that-is-what-government-does

mr_basil_seal — September 17, 2012 at 7:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Joe Scarborough continues to reign as the biggest baddest blowhard in TV media today. (yes more than O'Reilly! )Stoking the fires of hate and partisanship while trying to come across as a "moderate conservative" to those ill informed that buy into his delusional self-promoting view of today's world. I try to watch this show from time to time because they garner some good guests once in awhile but...Joe with his blown up ego and his sidekick on the set drug taking bobble head doll Mika make it too tough. Throw in a Wall Street imbed Dem or two, along with many "in the know" Forbes types, and you have the political calculus of "Morning Joe".

Stoking the fires of hate for political/viewership gain. Great job Joe! Now this guy is talking about a run for Prez in 2016 and has started a film and TV production company!?! I'm sure a new hate film directed at the Muslim world will be in the works!

Joe, you're emblematic of everything wrong with today's media politics.

Hey, this could be the start of something new. Each week a TV show review!

**Joe Scarborough: 'They' hate us**

Lest you thought the "they" to which referred was a small group within the world's Arab and Muslim population, Scarborough clarified: "One intelligence person told me, if you scratch the surface, and if you gave every street vendor to prime minister in that region a chance to throw a rock at the U.S. embassy, they would," he said. "So this [film] is their excuse."

**Don't let facts get in the way Joe...**

So... In Libya, where U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed, a majority of citizens (54 percent) approve of the leadership of United States' leadership, according to Gallup. That's up from 30-percent approval ratings in 2010 and 2011, and just one point below our current approval rating in Israel. 2011 approval ratings elsewhere range from 9 percent (Iran) to 37 percent (Algeria) -- not a majority, but certainly far from "every street vendor to prime minister in that region" (though what he mean by "that region" is of course unclear.)

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/09/joe-scarborough-they-hate-us-135722.html?hp=r2

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/10/joe-scarborough-mika-presidential-run

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 9:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**'SNL' Takes Clint Eastwood's Chair Act On The Road (VIDEO)**

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/16/snl-clint-eastwood-chair-video_n_1888218.html?utm_hp_ref=comedy

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 9:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Translation: I'm a lifelong Congressional House politician. Trust me.*

**Paul Ryan, Romney Campaign Stumble Over Questions About Which Tax Loopholes They'd Close**

Mitt Romney's campaign continued its trend Monday of refusing to specify which tax loopholes he and running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) would close if elected, on the same day the campaign vowed to "reinforce more specifics" regarding what a Romney presidency would look like.

The Republican presidential nominee sought to refocus the debate on the economy with the release of two new ads on Monday, after his campaign spent much of last week trying to mitigate the criticism he incited when he condemned President Barack Obama's handling of attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions in Egypt and Libya.

According to campaign aides, the new push will include a series of speeches aimed at laying out more detailed plans for a Romney-Ryan administration. Romney will focus on job creation, energy independence and reducing the deficit, while Ryan will highlight plans to deal with the debt and deficit.

But the specifics stop short when it comes to answering the looming tax loophole question, based on a new interview with Ryan released late Sunday night and a Romney campaign conference call held Monday morning to discuss the state of the race.

**Romney and Ryan have repeatedly stated that they would offset tax cuts for the wealthy by closing tax loopholes, without identifying which particular loopholes they would close.**

The new interview with Ryan, conducted by David Brody of CBN News, offers little variation on their standard response.

**Asked whether there's a reason he and Romney aren't naming specific tax loopholes, Ryan responded, "Yes because we want to get it done." He went on to explain that his 12 years of experience on the House Ways and Means Committee has made him "very familiar with how to make successful tax reforms take place."**

Read more @

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/paul-ryan-tax-loopholes_n_1890790.html

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 11:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


what is it with Ryan? He signed onto the Nordquist pledge, agreeing closing loopholes was raising taxes, which is true. But now, as Obama's talk-only talk, he did sign onto extending tax cuts for the rich-of raising taxes on the wealthy has gotten some traction, now Ryan's onto that, closing loopholes. I guess you gotta go with the wind when trying to get elected as all of them do. I also wonder if after elected, Obama will follow thru this time. Fooled me once already.

As neither candidate has the cajones to address a bloated military and cut there, talk of deficit reduction is BS. It's just a problem to kick beyond the next election, and start lying again about how they will reduce the deficit. As disappointed as I am with Obama's tenure, Romney/Ryan will probably have me yearning for the good old days of Bush.

mrd — September 17, 2012 at 1:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 17, 2012 at 1:07 p.m.

It is not the candidates that lack the "cajones", it is those of us who elect them. Both parties are running on platforms of more war and more oppression. Anybody with any moral fiber will vote third party. Forget the argument of wasting your vote because on real matters like our personal freedom, undeclared wars and government spending there is no difference.

frobert — September 17, 2012 at 1:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Look for The Obama camp to make much hay of this, as well they should. Maybe the House will truly be in play. Just amazing!!

**On Vacation Again! For Two Months!**

On Friday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced that after next week, the House will recess until November 13 to ensure that several vital bills remain in limbo until after the general election. In some respects, it does show consistency on the part of House Republicans who have made it their practice to accomplish nothing to deny President Obama any success at creating jobs or improving the economy, but in reality, the Republicans are “keeping millions of Americans unemployed to put one man (President Obama) out of a job.” It is little wonder that 60% of Americans have labeled this Congress as “the worst Congress ever” with an approval rating in July of 12%.

When the House goes on hiatus next week for two months, they will leave seven major bills languishing, 12 fiscal year Appropriations Bills, drought assistance, postal service reform, cyber-security legislation, fixes for Medicare reimbursement rates, and the Alternative Minimum Tax all unaddressed. The seven major bills are crucial to Americans, and many of them passed the Democratically-controlled Senate through mostly bipartisan efforts, leaving thinking Americans to assign the blame directly to House Republicans, and specifically to John Boehner. Now, pundits tend to blame the extremists in the tea party caucus of intransigence on compromise, but their obstruction fits in to the Republican’s promise to block any economic recovery efforts they planned on inauguration night in January 2009.

Some of the bills they refuse to even consider are job creating bills that are crucial to economic recovery, and just the uncertainty is already responsible for the loss of jobs in a burgeoning industry manufacturing durable goods for the global market. Despite bipartisan support in the Senate that may act next week to renew an expiring wind energy tax credit, the House is unlikely to pass the renewal that already led to job cuts and threatens the wind energy industry. There is a similar scenario with the Veterans Job Corps Act where the Senate is considering bipartisan legislation to assist America’s veterans find jobs, prompting the Air Force Times to report that House Republicans have “shown no interest” in legislation to support veterans who served the country.

Read more @

http://www.politicususa.com/house-republicans-set-month-vacation-creating-0-jobs.html

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 2:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 2:04 p.m

Why do you feel the need to repost every piece of liberal propaganda?

frobert — September 17, 2012 at 2:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro-

you're the expert on this stuff. I thought the other chamber of Congress had to approve an adjournment of the other chamber if it was longer than a week or something like that. If that's the case, the Senate controlled by Democrats, had to approve the House's adjournment.

BTW-agree with your take in earlier post. I guess, given today's money in politics, how a 3rd party president would ever be elected, and if one somehow could pull it off, how long it'd be before the big money took him to the woodshed and told him what's what. I'm guessing it would be his Christmas present, if not sooner.

mrd — September 17, 2012 at 2:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 17, 2012 at 2:46 p.m.

You are correct that the other chamber must approve recess, but I am no expert. I have not seen the story from any reputable source so I took it with a grain of salt. If you read his link it launches into a tirade about the totally debunked myth that republicans have offered zero jobs bills. I am not a fan of the republicans, but they they have launched plenty of bills that have been obstructed by the democrats, in other words politics as usual.

frobert — September 17, 2012 at 3:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*fro-*

*you're the expert on this stuff. mrd* — September 17, 2012 at 2:46 p.m. :)))))

---

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 2:04 p.m

*Why do you feel the need to repost every piece of liberal propaganda?*

I'm sure there's quite a bit of liberal propaganda I haven't gotten to yet.

---

And @ 1:26- *Anybody with any moral fiber will vote third party.*

Sooo. The over 100 million Americans that vote Republican/Democrat this election lack any moral fiber. Quite the provocateur! :) Or perhaps this train of thought helps you in some way validate yourself in life. Regardless, I hope every self professed Libertarian has this view in November.

---

**Mitt Romney abruptly shifts strategy**

The news ads are a concession to internal critics of the previous Romney ad series — 16 “A Better Future” ads, customized for nine swing states. Each begins with a clip of Romney at the convention, followed by a quick statistic arguing that Obama has failed that particular state, and ending with Romney’s plan to help the state (defense in Colorado, home values in Florida, manufacturing in North Carolina).

Some Romney officials had argued that straight negative ads would be the only way to move numbers the way the campaign needs to.

Romney also plans to emphasize policy solutions when he speaks Monday to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, in Los Angeles. “I expected the president, at his convention, to talk about the unemployed and to unveil a jobs plan,” Romney says in prepared remarks. “Astonishingly, he did not.”
Romney, badly losing the Hispanic vote to Obama, includes a pitch to improve “legal immigration.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81283.html#ixzz26lrJl6Sm

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 4:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 4:20 p.m.

**Any** liberal or conservative who supports Obama\Romney policies of assassination, undeclared wars, indefinite detention and drug war are without moral fiber. These two neocons support policies that make Bush look like a champion of civil liberties.

frobert — September 17, 2012 at 4:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Romney steps in it again! [VIDEO]**

Mitt Romney described almost half of Americans as “dependent upon government” during a private reception with donors earlier this year and said those voters will likely support President Obama because they believe they are “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.”

The blunt political and cultural assessment by the Republican presidential candidate offers a rare glimpse into Mr. Romney’s personal views as the campaign enters its final 50 days. Liberals quickly condemned the remarks as insensitive and Mr. Obama’s campaign accused him of having “disdainfully written off half the nation.”

The recordings surfaced even as Mr. Romney sought to retool his campaign message amid internal campaign sniping and calls from Republicans outside the campaign for him to be more specific about how his policies will fix the nation’s economy.

The video clips raised the possibility that his campaign would once again be sidetracked by Mr. Romney’s own words, a problem that has plagued the former Massachusetts governor since his hard-fought battle with Republican rivals during the nominating contests earlier this year.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/romney-faults-those-dependent-on-government/?hp

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 5:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


***I LOVE IT, HEY LET'S ELECT THIS IDIOT***

Romney: Nearly half 'believe they are victims'

Already scrambling to steady a struggling campaign, Republican Mitt Romney confronted a new headache Monday after a video surfaced showing him telling wealthy donors that almost half of all Americans "believe they are victims" entitled to extensive government support. He added that as a candidate for the White House, "my job is not to worry about those people."

hawkeye — September 17, 2012 at 6:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk- I just saw his hastily drawn press conference to address this, in which he only took three questions. A deer in the headlights moment. This guy is toast as a candidate. Each day brings something else to the table that's not eatable.

I believe the right wing will soon totally disown this guy and invest most of their money into Congressional races.

He pretty much just called half the population freeloaders. This will resonate with Seniors on Medicare and Social Security, on those out of work and/or making less money due to the melt down in 07'-08', to special needs families, for those paying on pell grants, to the average worker, those on disability, recipients of small business loans, grants,....hell, just about everybody.

Winning back the House, the Senate retained, the Presidency and beyond! :))

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 7:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 7:38 p.m.

It seems to me two years ago at this point you thought you had super majorities for sure.

frobert — September 17, 2012 at 7:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Today, Mitt Romney Lost the Election**

You can mark my prediction now: A secret recording from a closed-door Mitt Romney fundraiser, released today by David Corn at Mother Jones, has killed Mitt Romney's campaign for president.

On the tape, Romney explains that his electoral strategy involves writing off nearly half the country as unmoveable Obama voters. As Romney explains, 47 percent of Americans "believe that they are victims." He laments: "I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

So what's the upshot? "My job is not to worry about those people," he says. He also notes, describing President Obama's base, "These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax."

This is an utter disaster for Romney.

Romney already has trouble relating to the public and convincing people he cares about them. Now, he's been caught on video saying that nearly half the country consists of hopeless losers.

Romney has been vigorously denying President Obama's claims that his tax plan would raise taxes on the middle class. Now, he's been caught on video suggesting that low- and middle-income Americans are undertaxed.
(That one is especially problematic given the speculation about what's on Mitt's unreleased pre-2010 tax returns.)

Corn tells us there are more embarrassing moments on segments of the video he hasn't released yet. Romney jokes that he'd be more likely to win the election if he were Hispanic. He makes some awkward comments about whether he was born with a "silver spoon" in his mouth.

But those are survivable. The really disastrous thing is the clip about "victims," and the combination of contempt and pity that Romney shows for anyone who isn't going to vote for him.

Romney is the most opaque presidential nominee since Nixon, and people have been reduced to guessing what his true feelings are. This video provides an answer: He feels that you're a loser. It's not an answer that wins elections.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-17/today-mitt-romney-lost-the-election.html

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 8:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit: Well, Romney cannot win without the vote of a lot of these poor "victims" who tend to vote against their own best interest, in spite of how he demeans and disparages them.

Amazing words from this cyborg-of-a-candidate.

Let's go to Oz and find the guy a heart, shall we?

manthou — September 17, 2012 at 8:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


COSTA MESA, Calif.—Mitt Romney stood by his comments captured on a hidden camera at a closed-door fundraiser earlier this year in which he called supporters of President Barack Obama "victims" and said they are reliant on government handouts.

In a hastily arranged news conference Monday night, he called his words "off the cuff" and "not elegantly stated," but given several opportunities to back off the comments, he did not.

Romney said he was merely talking about the "political process of drawing people into my own campaign." He described the incident as a "snippet of a question and answer session" and called on the full video to be released to show the question and his response in its full context.

Asked if he was worried that he had offended the 47 percent of people he mentioned in the statement, Romney did not back off his remarks.

"It's not elegantly stated, let me put it that way," Romney said. "I'm speaking off the cuff in response to a question, and I'm sure I can state it more clearly in a more effective way than I did in a setting like that and so I'm sure I'll point that out as time goes on."

But, he added, "It's a message which I am going to carry and continue to carry."

Still, Romney ignored a question about whether he really believes what he was saying. Asked if his words were reflective of his "core convictions," Romney simply walked away.

hawkeye — September 17, 2012 at 9:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou- Count me all in for Oz. The narrative on this guy gets worse with each passing day.

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 9:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Just for kicks...

Click on Fox news and try to find the biggest news of the night. (Romneys video screw up)

Even when you go to the politics section...it's like playing Where's Waldo. :))

http://www.foxnews.com/

nailingit — September 17, 2012 at 10:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail and Manthou, I am still not sure the dude is toast. Given how people tend to vote strictly by party without any real information, who knows. They just dropped a birther lawsuit in Kansas, another moron trying to keep Obama off the ballot attempt... Showing the ignorance of many once more.

Mitt thinks nearly half of us are on dole. He thinks one is middle class if we make $200k or more. Out of touch, no grounding in reality. And still people he intents to either ignore or hurt with his politics will vote for the lily-white boy. Against their own self-interest. Unfathomable.
But then, we all got no moral fiber anyway as Fro pointed out to us.

luvithere — September 18, 2012 at 5:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


According to The Columbian's latest poll around here 50%+ of us want the US to quit being the world police in the middle east. After reading the front page of this mornings C, I agree. This clown wants the US to censor one of our own. He also wants the US to pull the movie from the net. His threat is that there will be more repercussions if we don't give in to his demands.

If the middle east is so easily riled then maybe it's time to pull out. When we get out take all of the toys and the MONEY with us. We sure as hell can use it here anyway.

The ONLY reason, I can see, that why we are still there is OIL. They really don't want our brand of freedom. They want their cake and eat it too. As long as their masses want to be ruled by a theocracy there is no way we will change their reasoning. Their own people will have to change the ruling class. God knows our politics can't.

JohnCasey — September 18, 2012 at 5:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere: Mitt's mouth is the gift that keeps on giving. Now the Palestinians don't want peace? Talk about over-simplified generalization.

The wealthy will vote for him to protect their stash of cash, no matter what he spews out. The dwindling middle class and poor who are right-leaning will go along, as you indicate, with what their party elite tell them to do, in spite of overwhelming evidence of his disdain for these folks.

And then I revert to my favorite personal explanation for voter choice: It is a statistical fact that half the US voting population have IQs under 100.

Can't beat the bell-shaped curve.

manthou — September 18, 2012 at 6:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Ohhh...if we could only have someone I'd consider adequate enough to fill the shoes as President this November. Don't get me wrong, folks. I think President Obama is a great husband, father and family man...but I believe when he took office, he wasn't expecting the mud (not my true word of choice but had to keep it clean) to be as deep as it is. I think he's in over his head. What do I think of Romney??? Again, a good family man, husband and father...

Long deep breath, big BIG sigh....

An honest Catch-22. He's makin' too many mistakes whenever he opens his mouth. Could he be a fall guy for the November election???

On one side, Pres. Obama sees the struggles of those unemployed who have lost everything including their deserved benefits and has tried to do everything to help them...yet on the other side, it's considered increasing dependency by the people on our government to accept help from our president. (shaking head)

Healthcare costs are not getting bad...they're already ridiculously deplorable, so our president is trying to implement Obama's Healthcare Program yet from another perspective, there are many issues which need to be settled before this can actually be implemented. I still cannot fathom why those who could afford to pay for their complete medical care who refuse to sign up for the program, those who want to maintain their independence from government control in any way they can, will have to pay what I determine as a "fine" for not signing up, not paying into the program. This alone pushes me away from the president at election time.

Again...the troops are to be pulled out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014, according to our president...but if they aren't pulled out all at once, are we leaving those left behind in harms way? Heck, they're already in harms way...anybody notice Dana hasn't been posting??? This truly concerns me.

There are those who can try to convince me that choosing Libertarian is the way to go...to choose Johnson for president, but is there truly enough support for this guy to throw votes his way? They can try to convince me that Obama needs 4 more years to complete what he has set out to do. They can convince me that Romney is the answer as he will build our nation's strength against those who loathe western civilization...

Again I say, Long Deep Breath...big BIG sigh.............................

goldenoldie — September 18, 2012 at 6:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The number one reason why I cannot wait for the election to be over...

These DANGED TELEPHONE POLLS and SOLICITATIONS by POLITICAL PARTY PEOPLE!!!! They call at the worst times, I swear!!!

Just last night...it was all about Monica S. Nice how my caller ID recognized the phone number as "Out of Area." Pretty tricky by the caller after *THREE CALLS* from a Democratic Party Survey number!!! Persistent little buggers, they are. Call the people at dinner...REALLY ticking them off...

Hey political solicitors...*DO YOU REALLY THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET THE ANSWERS YOU SEEK???* Of anything, you're going to push people to vote for the other guy out of disgust from the harassment by you!!!

Maybe I'll put the answering machine on...or maybe I'll disconnect the phone during supper and during my evenings with my other half. Friends and family know how to get hold of me otherwise.

goldenoldie — September 18, 2012 at 6:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Now...time to step away from the computer for me this morning! Lots to do including getting my bonus crop of Roma Tomatoes going in the food dehydrator, whippin' up a batch of smoked salmon patties from a couple smoked filets of the Kings landed this weekend in the Columbia (nice and bright - still have nice roasts...you can't smoke an entire King Salmon like the ones we got - just smaller sections of it), along with other various tasks of the morning.

Everyone, I wish you a fine morning...and remember to be kind to one another today!!! We're all in this rocking boat together! How 'bout we keep it afloat with all passengers remaining in the boat!!!

goldenoldie — September 18, 2012 at 6:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


OK: Off Topic Altert

There is an annoying helicopter buzzing around my downtown home incessantly this morning. I mean UNRELENTING.

Anyone knows what gives? I checked traffic and it is not that bad.

Sheesh.

manthou — September 18, 2012 at 6:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — September 18, 2012 at 6:56 a.m.

I had a police helicopter fly low over my neighborhood last week, and I didn't even know that we had a police helicopter.

frobert — September 18, 2012 at 7:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou-

Curious, can you back up the voting IQ stat somewhere.. The average IQ in the us is about 100.. So whats your point? People with a lower IQ are what??? Just curious as you must have recently completed a study comparing I Q and Voting...

I do agree on the Helicopter noise this morning as it was mostly from News 8 hovering over the back up on I-5 from 2 earlier bridge lifts... can't wait for the new bridge as I'm sure we'll hear less helicopter noise in the morning... LOL

vanwadreamer — September 18, 2012 at 10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Leave “our children” alone!**

Ryan and Romney love to play the kiddie card. They just won't tell the Youth just how screwed they'd really be

What we see in this election season is a bunch of middle-aged and elderly politicians addressing elderly voters about what’s best for “our children and grandchildren.” As a 27-year-old, I suppose I’m at the tail end of the “our children” category. So allow me to offer a riposte that I don’t claim speaks for my entire generation and all those younger, but does speak for quite a few of them: Stop saying that you’re doing anything for our benefit.

We’re onto you. We know that in our shattered political system, the more often “children and grandchildren” are invoked, the more likely those same doe-eyed youths are to get the shaft. You’re jinxing it so badly, right now. Stop! Take your full benefits, exert your demographic voting prowess, whatever. But please, for the love of God, spare your children and grandchildren the audacious explanation that this is done for their sake. They are not so stupid as to believe that self-sacrifice is your true motivating force in electoral politics.

..

And so the country’s children and grandchildren, facing this diminished future, are expected to turn to Ryan, whose policy proposals would ensure that this diminished future is expedited into a diminished present and future. Ryan’s budget plan over the next decade would add to this soaring debt that so, so burdens our weary-eyed youth by sending massive amounts of would-be tax revenue back to the aged, comfortable, wealthy top income tax brackets.

What Ryan would do next is shred the social insurance programs that middle-aged and elderly folks have enjoyed for half a century. But there’s a caveat, and a sizable one: Those who would be 55 and older at the time of Ryan plan’s passing would be able to keep things like, say, their Medicare plans, exactly the way they are right now. The profound actuarial reasoning behind this caveat is that advocates of the Ryan plan don’t want to lose political elections, and the elderly play a key part of the Republican Party’s demographic.

This — the fact that a plan is being defended as benefiting current children and grandchildren while asking nothing of current parents and grandparents — is where the Ryan plans skips from typical political exaggeration to searing immorality. Because there’s a dirty little secret about children and grandchildren: They eventually get old. And why they’d want to eliminate the most efficient means of providing healthcare for the future, older versions of themselves, while their parents and grandparents still enjoy it, is a question that Ryan has never really confronted.

Do what you will, Ryan and Romney. But please. Leave the kids out of it.

Read more @

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/18/leave_our_children_alone/

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvit-*Nail and Manthou, I am still not sure the dude is toast.*

luvit, I'm reminded of Yogi Berra's famous quote, "it ain't over till it's over". For reasons you mentioned and manthou's spot on observation, conservative bell curve balls could strike out common sense and common interest at the plate. Combined with enormous amounts of unchecked money and voter suppression, we can only hope for the best.

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 10:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Here's a schedule of the Presidential/Vice Presidential debates coming up. Right around the corner! A town hall format for the 2nd Prez debate.

No amount of $$$/media ads/skewed news will be able to manage the responses. Who has a better understanding of foreign/domestic policy, what direction to take, and is able to think on their feet under pressure will be on display for the world to see! I love these things!

http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-debate-schedule/2012-presidential-debate-schedule/

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 10:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


For those of us who try and keep our money at home. I was in disbelief at the price of American made Levis 501, till I checked out their site. Something has to change!

**Made In America Is A Luxury Label That Will Cost You**

To be all-American these days is a luxury proposition. A pair of domestic-made 501 Levi's? Those cost a cool 178 bucks. In cowboy terms, that's a boondoggle.

Mike Catherwood, 33, admits as much. The co-host on the radio advice show "Loveline" has been trying to buy only American-made products as part of a year-long experiment chronicled on his Domestic Journey blog.

"It’s definitely more expensive [to buy American-made products]," Catherwood said, speaking from his Cadillac while stuck in traffic on the way to the airport in Los Angeles. Since he started the experiment last January, his aim has been to draw more attention to American-made goodness.

But instead his experiment underscores the new truth about American-made products: The only people who can afford to buy them are the richest ones. "I am capable of it," he acknowledged, "but I don’t think it’s feasible for everyone to do this."

During an election year, buying all-American takes on new significance as each candidate tries to peg the other as less patriotic using the cars they drive, the foods they eat and their their positions on outsourcing.

But for all the noise about which candidate is the biggest American consumer, another message gets lost: Most Americans can only afford to buy imported goods. The average American household had a median income of barely $50,000 in 2011, according to the latest Census figures released last week. That's just enough to shop at stores like Walmart and Old Navy, emporiums of cheap imported goods.

Take the classic "Born in the USA" outfit: blue jeans, white T-shirt, work boots. The three items, all USA-made, cost $421: domestic-made Levi's 501s ($178), American Apparel white T-shirt ($18) and classic Red Wing work boots ($225). The same outfit with imported goods is far cheaper: Brahma-brand work boots from Walmart ($33), a white Hanes T-shirt ($6) and Gap classic blue jeans ($60) add up to cost less than $100.

"People are fearful that trade is harmful and they only see that its costing us jobs," said Jason Taylor, an economic historian at Central Michigan University. "But these lower prices keep the cost of living down for every American, but it's especially relevant for the lower and middle-class."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/made-in-america-the-luxury-label-will-cost-you_n_1891127.html

http://us.levi.com/family/index.jsp?categoryId=11326985

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 11:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**BIG BREAKING NEWS!!!**

**Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Aside Voter-ID Ruling**

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court set aside a ruling that permitted enforcement of a voter- identification law, asking a lower court to assess the availability of alternative forms of identification.

Pennsylvania is one of nine states requiring voters to show a state-issued ID before casting a ballot. A state analysis found the photo requirement might exclude as many as 759,000 people, or 9 percent of Pennsylvania’s electorate, from voting in the presidential election. Democratic President Barack Obama carried Pennsylvania, which has 20 of the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency, by 620,478 votes in 2008.
“We find that the disconnect between what the law prescribes and how it is being implemented has created a number of conceptual difficulties in addressing the legal issues raised,” the high court wrote in its decision today.

The justices asked the lower court, which had found the measure permissible, to submit a supplemental opinion on the question of ID availability by Oct. 2. Two dissenting justices said it was too close to the general election to consider the merits of the law and that the lower-court’s decision should be reversed.

Driver’s License
Pennsylvania’s law, enacted in March, requires a driver’s license or other state-issued ID, or an acceptable alternative such as a military ID, to cast a ballot in November. The Pennsylvania Department of State on Aug. 27 began offering a new identification card for voting as a last resort for those unable to obtain any other state-issued ID.

Proponents argued that the law, backed by Republican Governor Tom Corbett, is needed to stop voter fraud and enhance the integrity of elections. In July, the state said in court papers that there were no incidents or investigations of in- person voter fraud, the kind addressed by the law. The American Civil Liberties Union, which sued in May, and advocacy groups said the measure was aimed at keeping some likely Democratic voters away from the polls.
Today’s ruling sets aside for now Commonwealth Court Judge Richard Simpson’s Aug. 15 decision upholding the law. After a weeklong trial in Harrisburg, Simpson ruled the plaintiffs didn’t prove voters would be disenfranchised by the law. The law is reasonable and non-discriminatory when viewed in the context of the widespread use of photo IDs in daily life, Simpson said in his ruling.

The case is Applewhite v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 71 MAP 2012, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-18/pennsylvania-supreme-court-blocks-voter-id-law.html

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 10:43 a.m.

Thanks for sharing the quick link to the schedule with all of us, nailingit. It is much appreciated!!!

goldenoldie — September 18, 2012 at 11:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Thurston Howell Romney
By DAVID BROOKS

In 1980, about 30 percent of Americans received some form of government benefits. Today, as Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute has pointed out, about 49 percent do.

In 1960, government transfers to individuals totaled $24 billion. By 2010, that total was 100 times as large. Even after adjusting for inflation, entitlement transfers to individuals have grown by more than 700 percent over the last 50 years. This spending surge, Eberstadt notes, has increased faster under Republican administrations than Democratic ones.

There are sensible conclusions to be drawn from these facts. You could say that the entitlement state is growing at an unsustainable rate and will bankrupt the country. You could also say that America is spending way too much on health care for the elderly and way too little on young families and investments in the future.

But these are not the sensible arguments that Mitt Romney made at a fund-raiser earlier this year. Romney, who criticizes President Obama for dividing the nation, divided the nation into two groups: the makers and the moochers. Forty-seven percent of the country, he said, are people “who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to take care of them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.”

This comment suggests a few things. First, it suggests that he really doesn’t know much about the country he inhabits. Who are these freeloaders? Is it the Iraq war veteran who goes to the V.A.? Is it the student getting a loan to go to college? Is it the retiree on Social Security or Medicare?

It suggests that Romney doesn’t know much about the culture of America. Yes, the entitlement state has expanded, but America remains one of the hardest-working nations on earth. Americans work longer hours than just about anyone else. Americans believe in work more than almost any other people. Ninety-two percent say that hard work is the key to success, according to a 2009 Pew Research Survey.

It says that Romney doesn’t know much about the political culture. Americans haven’t become childlike worshipers of big government. On the contrary, trust in government has declined. The number of people who think government spending promotes social mobility has fallen.

hawkeye — September 18, 2012 at 11:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Part Deux; Trust me, it's worth it!

The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees. As Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, the people who have benefited from the entitlements explosion are middle-class workers, more so than the dependent poor.

Romney’s comments also reveal that he has lost any sense of the social compact. In 1987, during Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62 percent of Republicans believed that the government has a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, only 40 percent of Republicans believe that.

The Republican Party, and apparently Mitt Romney, too, has shifted over toward a much more hyperindividualistic and atomistic social view — from the Reaganesque language of common citizenship to the libertarian language of makers and takers. There’s no way the country will trust the Republican Party to reform the welfare state if that party doesn’t have a basic commitment to provide a safety net for those who suffer for no fault of their own.

The final thing the comment suggests is that Romney knows nothing about ambition and motivation. The formula he sketches is this: People who are forced to make it on their own have drive. People who receive benefits have dependency.

But, of course, no middle-class parent acts as if this is true. Middle-class parents don’t deprive their children of benefits so they can learn to struggle on their own. They shower benefits on their children to give them more opportunities — so they can play travel sports, go on foreign trips and develop more skills.

People are motivated when they feel competent. They are motivated when they have more opportunities. Ambition is fired by possibility, not by deprivation, as a tour through the world’s poorest regions makes clear.

Sure, there are some government programs that cultivate patterns of dependency in some people. I’d put federal disability payments and unemployment insurance in this category. But, as a description of America today, Romney’s comment is a country-club fantasy. It’s what self-satisfied millionaires say to each other. It reinforces every negative view people have about Romney.

Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop?

hawkeye — September 18, 2012 at 11:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail,

Who are some of the likely voters they "R" were trying to keep away... In your opinion? 759K don't have one of these forms of ID HUM.....Hum... Hum... I find that number well like many other numbers people post.. Out there.. Where did they find a study in Penn that backed up that statistic. So they have that statistic but can't make a correlation between the study and the election do to the fact it's too close to the election.. GEEZ... They should call penn State and get the rest of the study.. It probably has the exact breakdown of who doesn't have a picture qualified ID...

The sampling might look like this.. Without some actually coming out and saying it..

Non resdient folks -8%
Non registered Voters 10%
Illegals-62%
Others- 10%

fact of the matter I don't believe the bill as it was passed was to do anything but keep those who weren't leagally able to vote from voting.. Just my opinion shared by many...

vanwadreamer — September 18, 2012 at 12:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


***Well that was fun, here, try this for giggles***

It's called, Are you more or less conservative than Mitt Romney. Apparently, I'm not!

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/0706/Are-you-more-or-less-conservative-than-Mitt-Romney-Take-our-quiz/How-do-you-view-health-care-reform-in-this-country

hawkeye — September 18, 2012 at 12:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Your very welcome goldenoldie. Can't wait!

hawkeye- Just took the test and the results did not surprise!

*You're more than a little liberal.*

*You're a lefty! You might even be more liberal than President Obama. You won't be voting for Romney come November.*

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 12:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer- Since there are an estimated 165,000 undocumented immigrants living in the state of Pennsylvania, and your unsubstantiated estimate of 62% percent of those 759,000 disenfranchised voters would be "Illegals", that would equate into 470,580 "illegals" as disenfranchised.

Almost 3X times the number you mention. Statistically impossible. You still haven't a clue as to those who are truly disenfranchised from voting with many of the new "laws" that are being hurriedly implemented before the 2012 election, regardless of the countless credible sources that ... document it. Surely you are able to google search to validate some numbers you believe are questionable. Try researching yourself instead of being ... dependent on others to do so for you.

Given the majority of your past postings, most likely you really don't care about facts an' such. But if you are at least a little sincere in your post, here is something to get you started.

Studies show that as many as 11 percent of eligible voters do not have government-issued photo ID. That percentage is even higher for seniors, people of color, people with disabilities, low-income voters, and students. Many citizens find it hard to get government photo IDs, because the underlying documentation like birth certificates (the ID one needs to get ID) is often difficult or expensive to come by. At the same time, voter ID policies are far more costly to implement than many assume.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/section/category/voter_id

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 2 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not casting judgement here, but it's interesting who Romney "pals" around with. Given his Mormon background and all.

**Marc Leder, Host Of Mitt Romney Fundraiser, Hosted Sexy Parties, Made Companies Go Bankrupt**

The host of a now infamous fundraiser at which Mitt Romney told donors that he thinks half of Americans depend on the government has a scandalous past.

Before hosting a May fundraiser for the Republican presidential candidate at his Florida home, Marc Leder, 50, hosted several debauched parties, according to the New York Post. The paper wrote about a "nude frolic" at one such party Leder hosted last summer at a rented home in Bridgehampton, N.Y.:

It was as if the Playboy Mansion met the East End at a wild party at private-equity titan Marc Leder's Bridgehampton estate, where guests cavorted nude in the pool and performed sex acts, scantily dressed Russians danced on platforms and men twirled lit torches to a booming techno beat.

Leder, who made his fortune as co-founder of the private equity firm Sun Capital, is linked to the darker side of private equity. Around 20 percent of companies that Sun Capital owns have filed for bankruptcy since 2008: 28 companies in all, including the restaurant chain Friendly's, according to The New York Times. Friendly's laid off 1,260 workers overnight when it filed for bankruptcy last year, according to Daily Finance.

Romney made controversial remarks at Leder's home in Boca Raton, Fla., on May 17, according to Mother Jones' David Corn, telling attendees that 47 percent of Americans are Obama voters who "believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/marc-leder-mitt-romney_n_1893117.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir;=Politics

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 3:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nails,

It's very simple to get the ID the law required for voting in PA - I'd be suspicious of anyone who could accomplish this.

PA replacement birth certificates cost $10.00. And they make it quite easy to obtain one (I've had to get a few over the years). http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/birth_certificates/14121

A PA state ID Card costs $13.50. It's also pretty easy to obtain, though they've toughened the requirements a bit. The hardest part (to me) is that they won't take cash or credit card - you have to pay by check. http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/driverlicensephotoidcenter/obtainingphotoid.shtml

All things considered, their identification requirements are MUCH easier to meet than those to get a job with Uncle Sam.

roger — September 18, 2012 at 6:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Meanwhile, in AZ, a judge has upheld the law that requires police officers to question someone's immigration status.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/arizona-immigration-law_n_1894658.html?icid=maing-grid7|maing6|dl2|sec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D207411

The part that gets me is that it's legal to require ID to show you're allowed in the country (especially if your name is Paco) just because a Maricopa County Sheriff's Posse member feels like hassling you, but we can't require someone to show ID to vote - one of the more important things we do as citizens.

And I'll bet if word got out that Romney backers were paying people to go vote in one of the 3 most important swing states (OH, VA, FL), then we'd suddenly become very interested in requiring those people to prove who they are.

roger — September 18, 2012 at 7:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- No doubt given my health, income, transportation etc, it would also be easy for me. Thanks for sharing the view through your lens.

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Voting is a right, not a privilege**

*Too many are prone to confuse the two.*

The deepest argument revolves around the moral status of voting. Last year, Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Zellers said, "I think (voting is) a privilege; it's not a right. Everybody doesn't get it because if you go to jail or if you commit some heinous crime, your (voting) rights are taken away. This is a privilege."

This claim rests on an obvious confusion. Anybody who believes in the Declaration of Independence will affirm that liberty is among our inalienable rights. Nonetheless, certain sorts of crimes are thought to warrant incarceration, which is a deprivation of liberty. Does that transform liberty from a right into a privilege? Of course not.

The real logic is different. Our society presumes (as some do not) that all human beings are equal in their possession of both human and civil rights and that the burden of proof in restricting those rights must be set very high. Some people argue that no reason is compelling enough to override the right to life, for example, which is why the death penalty will always be a contentious issue.

Hardly anyone makes that argument about liberty, which is why a life sentence without parole is widely regarded as a legitimate substitute for the death penalty. Without the ability to deprive some law-breaking citizens of their liberty, our entire justice system would come crashing down. But no one thinks that turns liberty into a privilege.

Voting is much the same. All citizens are presumed to be equal in their right to vote. Yes, most felons do forfeit their right to vote, at least temporarily. (We argue about whether permanent forfeiture is legitimate, even after felons have "paid their debt to society.") But if we take the equal right to vote seriously, we must not pass laws that implicitly treat voting as a privilege that some are fitter than others to enjoy.

To confuse that right with a privilege is to change the understanding of American citizenship, and not for the better.

Read more @

http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2012/aug/19/voting-is-a-right-not-a-privilege-too-many-are/

nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 8:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 18, 2012 at 8:11 p.m.

Voting should be a right but it is not, the right to vote is not mentioned in the Constitution, the right to liberty is. Voting can't be denied for reason of race, sex or age(if over 18) and any other constraints must be equally applied, under the 14th. If the government decided that people who smoked marijuana or drank liquor could not vote, they could.

Voting should be a right for all people, and we should have a Constitutional amendment to support this. This would be a much better position than the current push to repeal the first amendment.

frobert — September 18, 2012 at 8:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


SALT LAKE CITY - Seeking to shift the attention away from a leaked video from a private fundraiser in which he said he doesn't have to worry about 47 percent of non-income tax paying Americans, Mitt Romney today sought to draw attention to a 1998 audio clip in which President Obama said he supports redistribution of wealth from "some" to "the others."

"The president's view is one of larger government, there's a tape that came out today where the president's saying he likes redistribution," said Romney during an interview with Fox News' Neil Cavuto, the candidate's first interview since the leaked videos showed Romney referring to 47 percent of the American people who feel "entitled" and who are "dependent" on government.

"I disagree," said Romney on the issue of redistribution. "I think a society based upon a government centered nation where government plays a larger and larger role, redistributes money, that's the wrong course for America."

Romney was referring to an audio clip of then-Sen. Barack Obama's speech at a conference at Loyola University in 1998. Obama said at the time that he thinks he does "believe in redistribution."

"I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution, because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level, to make sure everybody's got a shot," Obama said at the time.

The audio file was posted on the conservative website The Drudge Report, which is run by Matt Drudge, a close friend of Romney campaign manager Matt Rhoades, under the headline "Revealed."

Romney used the audio to try and paint Obama as someone who supports the government taking "from some" to "give to the others," dubbing it an "entirely foreign concept."

hawkeye — September 18, 2012 at 8:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


pt.2

Asked by Fox News' Cavuto if he was concerned he may have lost the electorate with his remarks at the fundraiser, Romney defended his argument.

"I recognize that those people who are not paying income tax are saying, gosh, this provision that Mitt keeps talking about, lowering income taxes, that's not going to be real attractive to them and those that are dependent upon government and those that think that government's job is to redistribute, I'm not going to get them," said Romney.

"I know there's a divide in the country about that view. I know that some believe that government should take from some and give to the others. I think the president makes it clear in the tape that was released today that that's what he believes," Romney added.

Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt fired back.

"The Romney campaign is so desperate to change the subject that they've gone back to the failed playbook co-authored by Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. Fourteen years ago, then-Senator Obama was making an argument for a more efficient, more effective government - specifically citing city government agencies that he didn't think were working effectively," LaBolt said. "He believed then, and believes now, that there are steps we can take to promote opportunity and ensure that all Americans have a fair shot if they work hard. Unlike Governor Romney, he doesn't believe that if you're a student who applies for a loan you're looking for a handout."

hawkeye — September 18, 2012 at 9 p.m. ( | suggest removal


==i've tried 3 times, and this won't post. doing again. NOT captcha issue===

*..here's an interesting tidbit....*

a papyrus that's smaller than a business card is being studied right now. it's owned by an anonymous person. it's apparently authentic. it's written about 400AD and in coptic language.

it includes these phrases:

> "Jesus said to them 'my wife' "
> "deny. Mary is worthy of it"
> "she will be able to be my disciple"

going to be interesting to see if anybody can find any more text to go with it.

very intriguing....
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/us/historian-says-piece-of-papyrus-refers-to-jesus-wife.html?_r=0

DeeLittle — September 19, 2012 at 2:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Regarding Romney's recent remarks behind the scenes, I agree with a statement that was made by him that the entire conversation should be shared. Showing snippets is strictly a devious partisan move by the Democratic side of the ticket. I would expect the same in return if it were Obama caught saying something which could be taken out of context.

..

Hawkeye, yesterday at 12:24 pm, you said in your comment "Are you more or less conservative than Mitt Romney. Apparently, I'm not!"

You're not what?

I took the test on the CSM website and I am entertained by the result. I'll just say that in my case, it turned out the way I figured it would...8)))

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


RE: Romney and the 47%. I believe the anti-Occupy crowd was throwing this same number out in response to Occupy's "we are the 99%". In response, numerous articles like this one were published that refuted that claim - in reality, almost everyone pays taxes.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id;=3505

This latest issue reflects what many have been saying all along - that the Repubs have no real vision/plan for economic recovery. Consequently, they've resorted to attacking the Pres himself. And their response to the latest in the Mideast - accusing the Pres of "apologizing" to the Muslim Brotherhood - just goes to show where they stand on the birther issue (Romney included).

Morning Joe did a segment this morning slamming how disconnected Romney is from reality - to include bringing up whether it's too late for the Repubs to dump Romney and run a candidate that can discuss issues knowledgeably.

roger — September 19, 2012 at 6:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:23 a.m.

Mine said I was just to the left of center, "probably Democrat".

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 8:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:23 a.m.

According to KPTV, the WHOLE video of Romney's speech has been released but I haven't been able to find it yet.

Here is the transcript

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/us/politics/mitt-romneys-speech-from-mother-jones-video.html?pagewanted=all

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 8:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye @ 8:15 am...

Mine said I was not to the left OR to the right...more central, lol. Pretty much how I've voted over the years would confirm that. Thanks for the link. My question is this...is that actually the entire transcript? I'd be questioning that because there's no introduction to Mr. Romney by another. Usually, there's greetings and welcoming of a presidential candidate, wouldn't you think???

Again, my skepticism is kicking in full gear.

..

Not another evening of those blasted phone calls!!! I finally got tired of it and told one Campaign solicitor (who called at 8:00 pm) with quite a stern voice...holding my composure, that after 12 of these stupid calls in one day...yes *12 of them*, I was fed up with surveys and polls and told them to quit calling. I then heard a "click" at the other end of the line, lololol. Guess that'll be my new course of action with these bozos from now on!!!

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 8:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 8:41 a.m.

I'm on the "do not call" list and have not received a single call.

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 8:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


So am I, Hawkeye...and I've recently updated it. Solicitations of this nature are exempt. They aren't asking for money or for you to buy anything.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I for one want to see and hear the full Romney video. No, I don't want to read the transcript, to easy to manipulate the words IMO.

Besides, why is the media all over this anyway, where were/are the questions when Obama told Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election. Flexibility for what? Inquiring minds would like to know.

Moving on here..to all the Muslims out there..you say your faith is all about love, understanding of others, peace etc..
Why is it then you are calling for the death of Americans, you have killed Americans, you have destroyed, burned, and torn the Bible and the American flag.
What makes you think your faith is the only one every single person on this earth should bow too?

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 9:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal



OK, here it is, it's long so it's broken up in three parts.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/watch-full-secret-video-private-romney-fundraiser

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 9:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


BILL MOYERS: Around 7 that evening Bernie Sanders finished, and what happened next was phenomenal. The Senate server, overwhelmed, went down – crashed. The switchboards were jammed. And like sparks from a hundred thousand watch fires lighting up the distant hills and hollows, his words flew across the country. That speech is now this book entitled, "The Speech."

http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-challenging-power-changing-politics/

mr_basil_seal — September 19, 2012 at 9:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


#Stick a Fork in Romney. He’s Done. This Presidential Election is Over!
By: Ohio Barbarian **Friday September 14**, 2012 8:46 pm


New polls are out today. You can stick a fork in Romney; he’s done. And he hasn’t even had the opportunity to screw up in a debate yet; which he undoubtedly will.

Six weeks before the election, even Rasmussen, with their notoriously Republican-biased polling, can’t get Romney over 46% in either Ohio or Florida. A new Marist poll, which is historically much more accurate, puts Obama at 50% in Ohio and 49% in Florida. Want links? OK, here’s a link:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Historically, no Republican has ever won without Ohio. Romney won’t win Ohio. The Republican Senate candidate, child-like-looking Josh Mandel, is trailing Senator Hangover(er-Sherrod Brown) by 8 points. No help there. The Republican governor of Ohio, John Kasich, is lying as low as he possibly can. Convention speeches don’t count. When Romney or Ryan shows up in Ohio, Kasich is nowhere to be seen. There’s a reason for that: whatever Kasich is, he’s not stupid.

And the University of New Hampshire came out with a poll with Obama up by five in the only New England state Romney had a prayer in. Even the Wall Street Journal has Obama at 49% in Florida, with Romney several points behind. As I said before, Romney lost any chance at Florida when he picked “Let’s privatize Social Security and Medicare” Paul Ryan as his VP.

http://my.firedoglake.com/ohiogringo/2012/09/14/stick-a-fork-in-romney-hes-done-this-presidential-election-is-over/

mr_basil_seal — September 19, 2012 at 9:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye, yup that's what I hear about Carter's grandson, said he did it for revenge for the GOP making fun of his granddad's foreign policies.

Thanks for the link to the full video, I'll watch it after I'm done at the DMV, that time of yr to renew tabs on my car.
Still makes me question the video is all there since as you said it's in 3 parts and it's on motherjones site.

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 10:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


basil, I think it would be funny if Ryan lost his re-election in his state as well.

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 10:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 10:29 a.m

Sorry, check that. Two parts. the third was audio only

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 10:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***See, this is the kind of thing that boils my blood. If oil is going down, why isn't gas. It doesn't work this way when it's going up!***

Oil prices are falling for a third day, as traders realize that a recent run-up to $100 may have been overdone.

Oil was at $92.34 in late morning trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. That's a decline of $2.95, or 3.1 percent.

Several things are pushing prices down. Analysts say traders are taking profits after oil got above $100 per barrel on Friday for the first time since May. Oil has fallen about 7 percent this week.

And there have more signs this week that the global economy is slowing down, which tends to push oil prices down because people and businesses use less energy.

Also, a U.S. government report on Wednesday shows crude inventories rose much more last week than analysts had expected.

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 11:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Moving on here..to all the Muslims out there.."
ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 9:24 a.m.

Darn! I had no idea they made paint brushes that wide!

Drift — September 19, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiQyZF...

Insert Mitt! :)

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 12:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Paul Ryan Is A Douchebag
If you've got the money, I've got the time: Last year, Paul Ryan was one of a few members of Congress to charge a fee to ask a question at his 'town hall' meetings.

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 2:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It will cost $15 to ask Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) a question in person during the August congressional recess.

The House Budget Committee chairman isn’t holding any face-to-face open-to-the-public town hall meetings during the recess, but like several of his colleagues he will speak only for residents willing to open their wallets.

Ryan, who took substantial criticism from his southeast Wisconsin constituents in April after he introduced the Republicans’ budget proposal, isn’t the only member of congress whose August recess town hall-style meetings are strictly pay-per-view.

Rep. Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.) is scheduled to appear Aug. 23 at a luncheon gathering of the Arizona Republican Lawyers Association. For $35, attendees can question Quayle and enjoy a catered lunch at the Phoenix office of the Snell & Wilmer law firm.

And Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.) took heat in Duluth this weekend for holding private events in his district’s population and media center — including a $10-per-head meeting to be hosted next week by the local chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, which on its invitation notes that the organization “supported Chip in his stunning upset over longtime Congressman Jim Oberstar in the 2010 election.”

It’s no secret why members of Congress would shy away from holding open town hall meetings — it’s no fun getting yelled at by angry constituents or having an uncomfortable question become an unfortunate YouTube moment.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61454.html

hawkeye — September 19, 2012 at 2:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Senate Republicans just blocked Patty Murray's veterans' jobs bill.

Just sayin'

manthou — September 19, 2012 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift @11:43 am: Broad strokes indeed.

manthou — September 19, 2012 at 2:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou @ 2:53- I've grown to expect republican obstruction, but this is stunning. :(

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 3:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


... and democrats including Murray and Cantwell blocked republican efforts to allow poor asthmatics to continue to breath by stopping the ban on over the counter inhalers. This is what the parties do, if you had any ethics you would be just as outraged by the actions of your own party.

frobert — September 19, 2012 at 3:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert: How do you know me well enough to question my ethics?

I report a fact at 2:56 pm. No editorializing whatsoever. I report a fact and you question my ethics?

Help me understand that connection, because it is lost on me.

When have I ever called you unethical when you did something similar? When have I ever called you unethical when I did not agree with you?

Point me in the right direction, pal, and I will apologize gladly.

manthou — September 19, 2012 at 4:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Too funny! Classic Colbert on the latest Romney debacle.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/stephen-colbert-mitt-romney-47-percent_n_1896549.html

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 4:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — September 19, 2012 at 4:16 p.m.

You were not the one that referenced republican obstruction, so in that respect you were not the focus of my statement. On the other hand you are the one who most often uses derogatory terms for those who disagree with you, so I will condemn your ethics on that.

frobert — September 19, 2012 at 4:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou, I've been the latest fixation with frobert's trolling. Sorry you got caught in the crossfire.

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 4:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Give me some examples, fro. When have I ever called someone a name who did not agree with me?

You have me confused with someone else.

manthou — September 19, 2012 at 4:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailing it: Yeah. He forgot about all the compliments I gave him for having some good ideas and an assertive, self-confident young woman who cares about making a difference for a daughter.

I know better than to feed the Trolls.

It has been a quiet day on here. Now, off to matters of consequence.......

manthou — September 19, 2012 at 4:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Okay Manthou, Nailingit and Frobert...when I first heard the report, what went through my mind was *"What the heck were they thinking?"* when the Senate Republicans blocked Patty Murray's ***$1 Billion dollar*** (over 5 years), pricey venture. But then I went ahead and read on, the information...the reasoning. Their reasoning stated was this - "they contend that it is an unproven and unaffordable program." (courtesy NY Times)

For once, I agree with their reasoning. I haven't seen anything... *ANYTHING!* The supposed economic recovery produced by the current administration to improve the jobs scene whether it be for our fighting brave coming home to unemployment, to exist here in the USA just like the rest of us have been doing. The only improvement by any Jobs Bills thus far, has been to recover a fraction of jobs lost They're still not above the jobs numbers originally recorded when Obama was sworn in as president. We're not in any jobs growth, folks...it's a very minimal recovery of a very low percentage of jobs lost prior to the current administration. Oregon's UI rates are up a tenth of a percent in August. Washington has lost 1,100 jobs in August as Unemployment rates continue to climb. In July alone, 44 of the 50 states reported higher unemployment rates. That's summer jobs lost...should be a busy time, especially in the construction industry and food packaging industry (blame the second one on the drought). Do I blame the current administration? Not for all of it! Do I blame the Bush Administration? Not completely! Go one step back....that's right...to Good Ol' Uncle Billy's Administration. Guess who signed NAFTA into agreement??? Yep, Bill Clinton...

THAT was the beginning of the end of our economic atmosphere we remember, folks. Add to the fact there's been a nasty drought along with the credit industry and how carelessly it was handled by not only those who have spending issues at home, but by the banks who extended credit to those who should never have received it in the first place. There's NOTHING that will improve our jobs for the veterans OR for the rest of the country till our own people re-spark the manufacturing industry on our own home front and certain banking practices are stopped...including the utilization of Credit Cards, Credit Extensions (and more). Add to the fact the spending deficit...the National Debt rates...

end pt 1

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


part 2

Now if you can figure out how we could afford yet another $1 Billion thrown in to the already spiked National debt plaguing this administration...even more so by charging fees to medicare providers and suppliers who are already delinquent on their tax bills (per quote by Patty Murray).

Do you *reeeeeally* think this bill was a good idea when they're going to be putting fees on entities who already aren't paying??? I suppose if there was another "Stimulus" or "Bailout" to excuse those who haven't been paying, you wouldn't mind having even less medical coverage for those on Medicare now, would you...or would you? The money's going to have to come from somewhere...so why keep stripping it from those on Medicare? You know the fees will have to come from someone....right???

It ain't gettin' any better yet, folks. They're expecting at least three more years of this. I could spray perfume on a skunk and it'll still be a skunk.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — September 19, 2012 at 4:35 p.m.

You and I had quite a discussion at one time, in which you insisted that your derogatory term for members of the tea party was perfectly reasonable. Singling out a group with whom you disagree and using offensive names to describe them is never okay.

frobert — September 19, 2012 at 4:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


part 3 (sorry so long)

Maybe it's time for everyone to downsize. No...I'm not speaking of moving to a smaller home or wearing a smaller size of clothing. I'm speaking of who you support whenever you head to the grocer, the clothing store, the car dealer. Instead of reaching for a brand spankin' new, top of the line car fully equipped with parts from China and Korea...head to the small town reputable used car dealer. No joke. Either that or pay to have your current vehicle tuned up, fixed up...at costs you can afford rather than the headache of yet another car loan or a payout most couldn't afford without a loan.

Till our own manufacturers return to building vehicles with parts made at home or clothing with labels other than "Made in USA," we're helping nations such as China and Korea instead of ourselves. Yeah, I know...I saw the comment about the price of USA-made Levi's...Well, that's because it's a big box company manufacturing them. Bet you could find a pair of slightly used Levi's with that label at a secondhand store.

When you're in the grocery store, do you check to see which veggies or fruit are coming from local farmers? How far away are you from the local farmer's food stand? Is it on your way to the grocer...or at least close??? Help the little guy, help the community to grow instead of these big box dudes.

(all done)

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


***MANTHOU!!!!***

Did I get your attention???

Take a deep breath...count from one to ten...think happy thoughts...

No matter what we think and what we share on here...it's still a beautiful day outside...and nice and cool for a change.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, nailingit, nailingit... your post @4:34 pm is just egging on the situation and is accusing someone who speaks their mind as trolling. That solves nothing and just aggravates the issue. Let them hash it out between them as two adults. How 'bout we get back onto task and discuss the issues instead? Are you game?

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


btw, nobody has to agree to what I say...just tryin' to keep the flow of discussion moving in a civil way.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


btw, nobody has to agree to what I say...just tryin' to keep the flow of discussion moving in a civil way.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 4:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

LMBO you said it!

soapbox4u — September 19, 2012 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Drift @11:43 am: Broad strokes indeed.
manthou — September 19, 2012 at 2:56 p.m.*

Why I am surprised at you manthou, since just yesterday you said;

*And then I revert to my favorite personal explanation for voter choice: It is a statistical fact that half the US voting population have IQs under 100.
Can't beat the bell-shaped curve.
manthou — September 18, 2012 at 6:01 a.m.*

Who's statistical fact? Only time I ever read that as a fact is always on some heavy left leaning rag.

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 5:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u — September 19, 2012 at 5:08 p.m.

LOL....did I unknowingly provide a bit of shock therapy for you, Soapie???

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 5:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Since you're up and about on the forum soapbox4u, I just wanted to say it's refreshing seeing that you've been sharing your opinion on subject matters (last week's forum) other than just teasing me lately. In the past I've enjoyed reading your comments...usually short and right to the point, even if I wasn't in agreement on occasion. I hope you share more.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 5:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Don't need your approval or opinion for anything, sell your wares somewhere else goldie.

soapbox4u — September 19, 2012 at 5:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Who's statistical fact? Only time I ever read that as a fact is always on some heavy left leaning rag.

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 5:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

What Elisi, too hard for you to type "median IQ in US" into Google Search and press enter? Lots of info beyond "some heavy left leaning rag", that supports manthou's statement.

soapbox4u — September 19, 2012 at 6:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Sorry soapbox4u...no can do, my fellow forum dweller. This is an Open Forum for everyone who wants to discuss issues and not be persecuted by others. I wasn't asking for your approval and am not selling anything. I share my opinion, my thoughts.

I am openly offering the olive branch to you as a friendly gesture in open discussion, civil...no strings attached. It's too bad if you are offended by that.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


and that should say open, civil discussion.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


""***See, this is the kind of thing that boils my blood. If oil is going down, why isn't gas. It doesn't work this way when it's going up!***""

Hawkeye, I've been asking myself the same questions. I've noticed the local gas stations don't match what the reporting industry trends. I've heard it's partly due to the fact that when they bought the fuel loads for their tanks, it was at the current price of fuel on the day they ordered. I sometimes find that hard to believe when I see fuel trucks twice in one week and the price just seems to rise lately.

I know it's changed the number of times I am out and about. Where it hits the pocketbook in the family is for the breadwinner's cost of fuel each week...and they're ready to implement tolls to boot!!! Yeah...when is enough, enough???

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u — September 19, 2012 at 6:06 p.m

ahhh the sounds of 10,001 apes randomly striking the keyboards

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 6:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


uh boy...that should say "I've noticed the local gas stations don't match what the reporting industry trends are showing."

Sorry folks.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


BTW...has anybody else in Columbianland heard any low, muffled explosions in the distance??? We've been hearing them all afternoon. It sounded like it was coming from the Cascades. I did hear military craft returning to PDX, so I thought maybe it was military training.

..

lol...I see the Columbian reported after my comment about the 1,100 jobs lost here in Washington State. Guess I was a bit ahead of 'em.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro, why are you attacking Manthou? considering the fact that you wrote that none of us had any moral fibers if voting for eitherDem or Rep. I thought that was pretty bad on your part.

Elisi, Iq and bell curve have zero to do with politics. The curve is used to describe a distribution in statistics. For IQ, the average and median is set at 100. Ergo half below and half above. I am wondering though if it is positively skewed for the sub pop of voters (meaning average is set at below 100 actually). Manthou? Your take, as we are speaking statistically here?

luvithere — September 19, 2012 at 6:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm truly wondering if the unemployment statistics are accurate, given they haven't figured in the mothers (and fathers) who have been home with their kids and are trying to find work to help with the family earnings and can't find anything. I mean it...how many women are out there right now, trying to find at least some part time work once the kids are back in school??? I know I did every year when my kids were of school age and so did several friends of mine. I honestly think the numbers shared are a guestimation based on polls taken rather than the actuals.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Golden and others that are interested, I happened to out n about looking for a new light bulb for one of my turn signals that had burned out in my car today.
Since many of us have been making it a point to try and buy "Made in America" products, I found that bulbs made by Sylvania are made in America. The LED's tho are made in Mexico.
So if you are looking for auto bulbs or the old incandescent style bulbs, look for Sylvania.

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 6:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — September 19, 2012 at 6:34 p.m

Pointing out the hyprocity of the democrats or republicans is in no way an attack on anybody.

frobert — September 19, 2012 at 6:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks, ELISI. It's always good to hear of what brands are still made here at home. I just wish some weren't so gosh darned expensive.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


A bill paid for and bi-partisan. Even those Republicans who wrote most of the bill, got everything they wanted, still voted against it. Politics at their worst.

I understand some of the electorate can't wrap their heads around it, but for Senators who understand it, wrote it and then voted it down, shame on you. Veterans deserve better than this, and we certainly deserve politicians that won't screw those that fight for our country.

**Senate GOP Blocks Veterans Jobs Bill**

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who is in a tight race for re-election, said the GOP blocked the bill because it's a White House proposal and because he is a co-sponsor.
"They are going to kill it on a technicality," Nelson said. "That is what is going on here, and it's sad."

Senate Veterans' Affairs Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said the cost of the bill, $1 billion over five years, is offset. She noted that a vote to block the measure is tantamount to saying the nation has done enough for veterans.

"A vote to support this point of order says that despite the fact that we have paid for this bill, despite the fact that one in four young veterans are out of work, despite the fact that veterans suicides are outpacing combat deaths, and despite the fact that more and more veterans are coming home, we are not going to invest in these challenges," Murray said.

The nation owes veterans "more than just a pat on the back for their service," she continued. "We owe them more than bumper stickers and platitudes. We owe them more than procedural roadblocks that will impede our ability to provide help now and into the future. We owe them action."

Murray continued: "We owe them real investments that will help get them back to work. And that's what this bill does."

http://www.rollcall.com/news/senate_gop_blocks_veterans_jobs_bill-217685-1.html?pos=hln

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 6:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, if you read the article from the NY Times which I've presented...it gives a slightly different perspective:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/veterans-jobs-bill-blocked-in-the-senate/

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 7:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — September 19, 2012 at 6:34 p.m

I have trouble with stats and polls being accurate. That's why I pay very little attention to either. I have to ask, did they test every single person, was every person asked the same question/s..we don't know.

When my son was in high school his teacher for psychology had the class take the same IQ test once a week for several weeks. Same questions, just moved around to what place they were.
Each week, students got different points. Some weeks higher than the first test results, some lower. The scores changed week to week. The teacher proved to the students with this testing that a persons IQ score can change, and can do so under different reasons such as stress.

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 7:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Poll: Mitt Romney '47 percent' remarks hurt independent support**

Almost three in 10 independent voters said Mitt Romney’s comments on the “47 percent” would make them less likely to vote for him in November, nearly twice the number who said the remarks make them more likely to support the GOP presidential nominee.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81408.html#ixzz26yJg1dfk

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 7:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Also nailingit...who's going to pay that billion-dollar promise to get the vets back to work? As I recall, there was a huge push to get people into college to re-train for new careers since theirs was phased out or went overseas...and a very low percentage has found work. Is a billion dollars worth that kind of a financial burden on taxpayers and medicare recipients for a very select few??? According to the article I presented, there's already programs available. Could this be grandstanding by Patty's crew to win votes as well??? Just about anything is fair game right now from what this skeptic has observed.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 7:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Polls are collected from a target group and are inaccurate information sources. Anybody can say one thing and believe another. Only the election will show the actual results.

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 7:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**The Romney Video and the Right's Quixotic Quest for the "Real Obama"**

Since 2007, Barack Obama's rivals have treated him almost like a monster of myth who could be defeated with the right tool. Since the apocryphal "whitey tape," an odd, false rumor about a tape purportedly showing the president's wife using a racial slur to refer to white people, conservatives have sought the holy grail that would end Obama's career, convinced that a pliant media has simply refused to unearth it—or worse, were deliberately hiding it to protect their hero. From the absurd conspiracy theories of Obama's birth and religion to the late Andrew Breitbart's website exposing the terrible truth that Obama once hugged an old man who spent much of his life fighting racial apartheid, conservatives have sought not only to obstruct Obama's agenda, but to expose him as the greatest hoax ever—American history's most terrible fraud.

The GOP has finally seen that silver bullet. Only it's not aimed at the guy they were trying to take out.

The Obama of conservative nightmares is not merely a bad president or one who pursues policies they disagree with, but a committed radical, a racist who hates white people so much that he would deliberately drive America to ruin and submit the nation to foreign—even Islamist—domination. Those on the right knew their worst assumptions about the president were true; they felt this in their souls. And nothing—from Obama's hawkish foreign policy to his embrace of a nationalized version of Romney's own universal health care plan in Massachusetts—would persuade them otherwise. One day, they would prove it: a college thesis, video of a speech, an unguarded utterance that would reveal, for all the world to see, the True Barack Obama.

Now fate finds Republicans, in the waning days of the 2012 campaign, faced with video of one candidate expressing his total contempt, his unfettered disdain for half of the country. Only it's not the guy they've been trying to take out. It's the guy they nominated.

There's something poetic about that. Particularly since the Mitt Romney in the video, sincere or otherwise, is nothing if not the exact candidate conservatives wanted, a being of their own creation. They built that.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/09/romney-video-47-percent-income-tax-republican-real-obama

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 8:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro, pointing out hypocracy is not an attack, telling me I got no moral fiber (because I don't support Paul I guess) is.

However, I say good night now, time to relax, read, sleep, dream of statistics...( some of us who studied them as a major actually like em).
Time to split hairs tomorrow again.

luvithere — September 19, 2012 at 9:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


All I have to say about this is...WOW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU7Ctg7ddPo

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 9:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — September 19, 2012 at 9:08 p.m.

The lack of moral fiber comes from republicans that blindly support their candidate when he supports raising taxes on the poor, expanding government and running roughshod over state's rights.

Lack of moral fiber is democrats blindly supporting their candidate when has done more to decimate civil liberties than Bush.

frobert — September 19, 2012 at 9:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**GOP Civil War Is Coming as Mitt Romney Campaign Flails in Video’s Wake**

The video carping about government moochers may well have sealed it. Mitt Romney is going down, and the fight already is on for the future of the Republican Party. The battle will be bitter—and prolonged, says Robert Shrum.

After the first debate, see if the doubts become a rout. One measure will be the conduct of the Republican super PACs. The corpulent moneybags of casino magnate Sheldon Adelson probably will continue to flow into the presidential ad wars; after all, Adelson stuck with Newt Gingrich as Gingrich struck out in the Republican primaries. But hardheaded operatives like Karl Rove could shift their resources to Senate and House contests. They’ll deny it even if they do it. And it wouldn’t be good news for Democrats; the possibility—or probability—is already worrying party officials.

Such a scenario also would set the stage for the GOP’s post-Romney civil war. The Tea Party Republicans who detest, or more accurately hate, this president will be maddened by his reelection. They will rage against it as illegitimate, stolen, un-American. You name it, they’ll say it. And they will tear at the GOP’s 2012 nominee as insufficiently conservative and insist that Republicans in the Senate and House block a second-term Obama at every turn.

A prudent party might venture at least a measure of cooperation and compromise, to prevent the standing of Republicans from collapsing as the economy moves back to prosperity. This is what smart GOP strategists will recommend. And it’s precisely what John Boehner will fear to do lest he lose his House speakership—or with hope, his minority leadership—to the lean and hungry Eric Cantor.

So with Romney consigned in 2013 to his four-car elevator mansion in La Jolla, Calif., the president may face daunting challenges to governing even as he once again reaches across the aisle. His mandate could prove momentary, which is what happened to Harry Truman, who achieved almost nothing domestically in the four years after his upset win in 1948. At least this time, the Supreme Court will be saved from a right-wing coup and health-care reform won’t be dispatched to extremist defenestration. And Democrats could hold the high ground for elections to come.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/18/gop-civil-war-is-coming-as-mitt-romney-campaign-flails-in-video-s-wake.html

nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 9:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 9:31 p.m.

More clueless garbage from a liberal rag? What a surprise.

frobert — September 19, 2012 at 9:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Another WOW..

Obama signed into law Bill HR 347 that makes free speech a felony where secret service agents are present.

"HR 347 gives federal agents sweeping powers to arrest and bring felony charges against citizens engaged in protest where the secret service is present."

Andrew Napolitano:

This "allows secret service agents to decide where there are no free speech zones".

"I can think of three violations: a) speech violations, b) association violations, c) the right to petition the government for a redress of you grievances. What good is free speech if the people in the government are so far away from you that they can't hear you?"

"I think it is one of those laws that's going to be enforced where the government wants to enforce. The problem there.. it puts a lot of unbridled discretion in the hands of secret service agents... That's suppressing speech on the basis of its content and that has been expressly prohibited by the First Amendment since Day One."

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 10:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Ok I'll try this again..

Andrew Napolitano:

This "allows secret service agents to decide where there are no free speech zones".

"I can think of three violations: a) speech violations, b) association violations, c) the right to petition the government for a redress of you grievances. What good is free speech if the people in the government are so far away from you that they can't hear you?"

"I think it is one of those laws that's going to be enforced where the government wants to enforce. The problem there.. it puts a lot of unbridled discretion in the hands of secret service agents... That's suppressing speech on the basis of its content and that has been expressly prohibited by the First Amendment since Day One."

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 10:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**ELISI**

there's so much ignoring of laws by government, it's become no biggie to anybody.

if the populace were lobsters, i think they'd be very warm by now.

keep the citizens' attention span away from what's really happening. break them into groups, have them identifying as something more important that just us citizens, then pit groups against one another.

tell them they're being cheated, taken advantage of, have them enraged by the self-created injustice.

give them things using money taken from other people. make them believe they're entitled to it. class envy into class warfare.

and all the time, subtly override the constitution. a little here, a little there. if caught, claim public safety or grab some power granted to states or citizens.

decide which laws will be upheld and which ignored. sue anybody or any state that dares to defy the decision.

and finally, make sure your enforcers can overwhelm any attempt by the populace to take back their government. not only with the irs and justice dept's selecting 'enemies' to attack, but with armed force so heavily equipped, they would never even run low on ammunition. ammunition, btw, which isn't even legal for the military to use in combat.

the constitution is fast becoming just another old document, fading away.

DeeLittle — September 20, 2012 at 4:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 19, 2012 at 9:31 p.m.

I have to agree with frobert at 9:46pm on this one, Nailingit. Instead of posting links obviously swayed in one direction, why don't you find information from those sites who lay no claim to any specific party???

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 5:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — September 20, 2012 at 4:10 a.m.

Dee, this is by far the best write I've read on the forum in recent days. It gets right down to the root of the issue which is crumbling the strength of our *"Republic"* of the United States. If people would just take the time out...step away from their political party of choice...and see everything for what it truly is...they'd be in total agreement with your statement. As ELISI has pointed out with HR 347 (and I could share hundreds more to prove my argument), there's been a lot of focus on the political arena/world issues while behind the scenes...our constitutional rights have had yet another little notch whittled away. We hear every day..."It's our Democratic Right this" or "It's our Democratic Right that...."

When people realize we are *not* a democracy...not even remotely close...and that the very foundation of our government is being reshaped into something hardly recognizable with these agendas behind the curtain, I'm afraid it'll be too late. Then they'll be scratching their heads asking *"Whu Hapn'd???"* We have a Democratic leader who is clearly not presenting the foundation of Democracy as stated in the definitions provided on any online dictionary. Would electing all Democratic leadership truly change our government into a Democracy? How many executive decisions have been made which have taken away our freedoms without any say from any of us??? Does Democracy include the increased need of dependence upon the people to their government?

Take a moment to read the actual definition of a democracy at dictionary.com and you will find discrepancies of just what we are as a nation when people think we're a democracy:

Right away, the first paragraph states "vested in the people...."
Are they really or are they increasing the government control on the people???

P. 2 claims we are a democracy. We are a *FEDERALLY CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.*

P. 3...*"A state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges"* Really??? equal rights and privileges??? And what is it everyone's been arguing here on the forum lately???

P. 4 "*Political or social equality; democratic spirit.* Yeah, right. There's no equality here in the forum, let alone our society. If you try to speak your mind and some disagree with you, they become insulting and rude. Now you can actually be arrested for speaking your mind. Freedom of speech or freedom abused?

And #5..."*The common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.*" Say what???? That's a belly buster.

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 6:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


from conservative blogger Lew Waters-

"Somewhere, there are fatcats wringing their hands to take Millions more of our tax dollars to perpetrate the fraud of light rail on citizens, whether they want it or not.

If these fatcats seeking alternative way to dig deeper in the struggling Clark County citizens pocket, why not just pool their wealth and build the thing themselves? Then, let them have all of the headaches, paying for operation & maintenance and reap all of the profits from fares.

Oh wait, there is no profit, is there?

Only by forcing tax payers to pay for it."

Is Lew finally understanding and disliking the redistribution of wealth upwards into the pockets of the "fatcats"? Welcome to the other side, Lew. Next thing ya know you'll be marching with the 99%.

mrd — September 20, 2012 at 8 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 20, 2012 at 8 a.m

Lew has always felt this way. It's just the fact that you as well as others have been deaf to what he has to say. You over look it to go straight to attacking the man cause he is a conservative
as many of you do to anyone that has an opinion or believe differently on issues.

A mind is truly a terrible thing to waste if not open to see both sides of an issue.

ELISI — September 20, 2012 at 9:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — September 20, 2012 at 4:10 a.m

BINGO! Thank you! I couldn't have said it better!

ELISI — September 20, 2012 at 9:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 6:40 a.m

100% Correct! This country is a REPUBLIC

Don't you just love the words, "common people"?
Why even Michelle Obama used those very words to refer to us,
the people of the United States of America as.."common people"
Doesn't that just make your little heart tingle?
Wow never knew we had a king and queen, I thought we had a president and first lady.

ELISI — September 20, 2012 at 9:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**SECRET VIDEO: On Israel, Romney Trashes Two-State Solution**

*At a private fundraiser, the GOP candidate calls Middle East peace "almost unthinkable" and says he would "kick the ball down the field."*

On his campaign website, Romney, whose foreign policy advisers include several neocons known for their hawkish support for Israel, does not explicitly endorse the peace process or a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But the Republican Party platform does state unequivocal backing for this outcome: "We envision two democratic states—Israel with Jerusalem as its capital and Palestine—living in peace and security." The platform adds, "The US seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, negotiated between the parties themselves with the assistance of the US."

In public, Romney has not declared the peace process pointless or dismissed the two-state solution. In July, when the Israeli newspaper Haaretz asked Romney if he supports a two-state solution and the creation of a Palestinian state, he replied, "I believe in a two-state solution which suggests there will be two states, including a Jewish state." Yet Romney’s remarks to these funders—this was one of his longest answers at the fundraiser—suggest he might be hiding his true beliefs regarding Israel and the peace process and that on this subject he is out of sync with the predominant view in foreign policy circles that has existed for decades.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/romney-secret-video-israeli-palestinian-middle-east-peace

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 9:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal



if Lew's list of "fatcats" was expanded from bridge contractors to include defense contractors, big banks, and contractors that feed on government contracts (think Haliburton) he could lead the next Occupy parade. Might get him tossed from the teabaggers however.

The conservative's biggest hypocrisy is the re-distribution of wealth. Going upwards is fine, they feel, as trickle-down economics or aiding the job creators is good for the economy. But moving the wealth downward into Romney's 47% is untolerable. Can't have that 47% profiting from the government, that position is reserved for the "fatcats".

mrd — September 20, 2012 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 20, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.

Is it really necessary to use a derogatory term to describe the tea party?

That being said, Lew is a neocon, he would have nothing to do with the tea parties desire to shrink government.

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 9:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — September 20, 2012 at 9:52 a.m.

Fro, you're questioning mrd yet you label Lew??? A Double Standard?

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 9:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 9:56 a.m

"Neocon" is a valid description of a political view, "teabagger" is a derogatory term. If MRD had used the term tea party it may have been an inaccurate term, but not derogatory.

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The grassroots movement didn't always consider "tea bagger" a slur: Early Tea Partiers innocently embraced the term until they discovered its vulgar connotations (see also the 1998 John Waters movie Pecker). In a twist, some conservatives have recently advocated that the word be reclaimed."

my bad, I guess I don't keep up with what the proper term is. They were for it before they were against it, did they revert to approving the term as some conservatives want it reclaimed?

mrd — September 20, 2012 at 10:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*But moving the wealth downward into Romney's 47% is untolerable. Can't have that 47% profiting from the government, that position is reserved for the "fatcats".

*defense contractors, big banks, and contractors that feed on government contracts

mrd — September 20, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.*

They might feed on government contracts, but they also provide jobs, a paycheck, health benefits etc for that 47%.

ELISI — September 20, 2012 at 10:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 20, 2012 at 10:08 a.m.

I have heard many woman describe themselves using derogatory words, does this mean it is reasonable for me to use the same words to describe all women?

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 10:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Democrats surge in key Senate campaigns**

Democratic candidates in some of the most critical Senate races in the country are surging, putting the party in its best position of the election cycle to keep its majority in November.

The reasons range from the post-convention bounce led by President Barack Obama, to potent Democratic attack ads, to anemic performances of some GOP candidates.

Fresh polling in marquee contests shows a distinct trend line in the Democrats’ favor, making the GOP’s narrow path to a Senate majority significantly more difficult with less than two months until the election.

Democratic candidates in Virginia, Massachusetts and Wisconsin are on the rise after navigating a summer of challenges, and benefiting from Obama’s growing strength in all three states. In Florida and Ohio, Democratic incumbents have so far withstood a tidal wave of spending by conservative super PACs and outside groups.

Senate Democrats said Wednesday that stumbles by Republican Senate candidates, infighting between the tea party movement and establishment wings of the GOP and effective Democratic ads have all helped their cause. The Democratic convention, they say, firmed up the party’s base.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81424.html#ixzz272EoE7Mq

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 11:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


If thats the case were in trouble for 4 more years. Maybe the Dems will have the "redistribution" method figured out by then. Some of us will be paying twice for Health care were not even using and taxes are sure to go up and for what...So we can bail out more companies while average guy takes it on the chin, How about helping us...Just a thought... This wasn't copied and pasted either...

vanwadreamer — September 20, 2012 at 12:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


oapbox4u — September 19, 2012 at 6:06 p.m

ahhh the sounds of 10,001 apes randomly striking the keyboards

ELISI — September 19, 2012 at 6:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

Forgot to take your depakote?

soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 12:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 at 6:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

You might try reading and answering the subject instead of changing it for your perspective.

soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 12:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Lew Waters seems to be a favorite target of Leftists. And since mrd brought him up regarding Water’s comments on FB, I’ll bring up Fran Hammond, who commented on the FB side about the story on the middle class losing ground. Some of you may remember Fran from her days as a forum poster before the FB change.

Here’s some of what Fran had to say:

> Why should my tax dollars pay our debts while the 1% sit their fat arses on their yachts?

My Point? Envy. Envy politics. Dear Fran makes no suggestion of illegally gotten wealth. Dear fran only expresses envy over those who have wealth. As far as I’m concerned, it is at the heart of the Democrat agenda, except for all of those wealthy Democrat senators, (there was a time, maybe 15 years ago or so, when 9 out of the 10 wealthiest U.S. Senators were Democrats. I have no idea what that number is now). I care not a whit, if Paul Allen has his 300 or 400 foot long yacht. So what. Those dot.com billionaires have enhanced the lives of us all. I do not believe they became wealthy by “taking” limited resources from others, but quite the opposite; by creating an entirely new economy.

BTW, I posted a link to a, I believe it was a USA Today study, a few months ago, that showed the wealthy DO pay a higher percentage of their income than others. The problem with talking about tax cuts for the wealthy, is that it does not take into account any benchmark from which to judge. “Increase” and “decrease” are relative to the starting points. I believe envy is perfectly normal, just recognize it for what it is, and all of its possible consequences.

And mrd, if you’re going to continue to post one quote after another, as you have often done, and have done once again at 10:08 a.m. perhaps you can cite your sources.

kn_dalai — September 20, 2012 at 12:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"They might feed on government contracts, but they also provide jobs, a paycheck, health benefits etc for that 47%."

well that notion makes the conservatives' view of socialism, in this case redistribution of wealth in the form of jobs and benefits, sensible. they do have one caveat, however, and that is privatization. As you noted, can't redistribute all this wealth without the corporate fatcats getting their cut.

mrd — September 20, 2012 at 12:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 12:20 p.m.

My fellow forum dweller -

After all these years you've been going after me, not once have you figured out that I share a different perspective only in hopes of generating a discussion with others so that I may understand how and why the other person comes to their conclusion when they share it. A good example was my question to frobert regarding the comment to mrd. Whether you believe it or not, my thoughts I share are mine alone but others may have something similar cross their minds as well. Oftentimes, a select few on this forum (not naming names) choose to go into attack mode with labels and unfriendly suggestions only because they have no answers to my questions or no viable response to counter my argument points. In human nature, the natural response is "fight or flight." It is a constant process to avoid fight in the manner of insults or ridicule, and it is also a much friendlier atmosphere if people could refrain from such behavior. Flight from an argument in some cases is the only result...much like the terms of service by the Web Editor when they recommend not answering those who continually pursue what would be identified as "trollish behavior." That wouldn't even be a needed recommendation by the Web Editor if people would remain civil.

You stated on Sept. 19 @5:57 pm and I quote "Don't need your approval or opinion for anything, sell your wares somewhere else goldie."

It was my understanding that you thought I was trying to gain your approval and opinion as I was not. Because I vocally state when I agree with someone, that isn't because I'm looking for their approval. When you "recommended" I sell my wares somewhere else...you know what it was you were telling me and so does everybody else. So is it okay if you show an agreement with someone else, does that mean you are seeking their approval???

As I've said to you before and I say now...I have extended the olive branch of civility to you. Do you accept or shall we end this discussion here and now?

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 1:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


In today's Columbian Web Edition, the article "Coast Guard Raises Concerns with CRC Work Plan," the folks with the CRC are making this issue sound like something that has just recently been brought to their attention when in reality, it's been an issue from the time their locally-preferred alternative design was finalized. Here's an excerpt from the "Columbia River Bridge Design" on the CRC website:

Navigation and aviation clearances affect bridge design

"In consultation with the U.S. Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration standard safety guidelines, the project established clearances for both river and air traffic. Current plans call for about 95 feet above the Columbia River datum, which provides between 75 and 95 feet of navigational clearance depending on water level. This proposed navigational clearance was identified in 2006 by CRC based on a previous survey of river users and airport navigation limits. *Some river users have stated they require greater clearances. The planned river clearance eliminates the need for a lift span. The air traffic clearance limits of Pearson Airfield and Portland International Airport could influence the height of features above the deck of the new bridge. Additional coordination with the Coast Guard and FAA on the bridge design is ongoing."*

I've highlighted the segment which clearly shows there was an issue with the USCG as well as FAA. The studies on river traffic were not studies by the USCG but rather, the CRC planners.

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 1:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hi goldeoldie, I like your suggestions on civility, it makes for much better discussions. I keep up on the discussions here but don't say much because of all the hateful, insulting and snide remarks from some of the commenters here. I like yours and rogers comments the best because, though, I disagree on a lot of things, I find the thoughts are not biased and are well thought out. I find the ones who view things on one side as all wrong and the other side is all right, are very narrow minded and so find it hard to accept anything they say. no side is all right or all wrong. I can find some things good in just about all topics. For instance Obamacare, I think the idea is a good one, I just don't see how it can be financed though.

rincon1 — September 20, 2012 at 2:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie,

Andrea Damewood's article blowing this issue with USCG approval open had linked to the document in the CRC's on-line files showing they were quite well aware of that 2006 meeting at the Red Lion. The one where Thompson and other river users made it clear they needed the 125 height to meet current and future shipping needs.

Less well publicized is that the CRC has never submitted a design to the FAA for review and approval. Further, Jeff Manning of The Oregonian interviewed the Pearson field manager recently. No one from the CRC has asked him what they actually need; his view was that the bridge would have to hit 130 feet before he would even start to take notice.

The CRC has made a habit of speaking for the approval agencies - rather than coordinating with them.

roger — September 20, 2012 at 3:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Rincon1, your comments are appreciated. Regarding Obama's Health Care Bill, it has it's positive points indeed...but as you say, financing would be an issue; not only for the financing at government level, but at the level for those who are without a job. It is my understanding that if they don't qualify for assistance and live in a household with wages and savings recorded, but the head of household insists they live there till they can once again get on their own two feet, that they are facing penalties as well for not paying their "fair share." The wages of the household do not reflect the predicament the person with no income is facing. What do you do??? Move out and live on the street in order to get free health care? Is this right???

It is my understanding that in the case of seniors on a fixed income...when the Health Care Bill is implemented, they will not have their Medicare benefits. Will they have to pay for insurance coverage or pay a tax penalty at the end of the year as well???

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the Bill so I hope others bring that to my attention...but if I am not, then you have to ask yourself...what will be the threshold...the deciding line between affordable medical care and destitution. To tax those who cannot pay, do not have the money to pay and are to be charged a tax penalty because they couldn't pay for their medical care in the first place is just not right.

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 3:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Forgot to take your depakote?
soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 12:17 p.m*

Oh soap you are such a fun filled little lollipop tripled dipped in marshmallow cream you make me smile. :)

Nope, don't suffer from seizures or mania nor bipolar disorder. Sooo I don't take depakote, do you take it? Is that the reason you know about it? A mental health official/dr would know about depakote, or one who takes it.

I do take losartan for blood pressure, singulair for allergies and advair for asthma. Anything else you need to know?

ELISI — September 20, 2012 at 3:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, it appears there's quite a big stall in the project due to the issues of height with the current design plan. I'm thinking they got in way deep...way over their heads on this one and the only way to back out of the project in it's current state is to bring forth something which was never solved in the first place. They know they don't have voter approval and they also know that now is the worst time to begin tolling the bridge(s) with our economy continuing to tank. They know the federal funding is dependent on voter approval of the light rail/BRT m&o; and they know Oregon doesn't have their share of the funding, let alone Washington State's issue with their share. They know people are going to scream if they have to begin paying from $3-7 each way. It's a sinking ship and the sump pumps ain't a workin', Roger.

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 at 3:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Alabama GOP chairman goes birther**

There are the birthers who don’t believe the president was born in the United States. And then there are birthers who think that maybe the president’s father was actually Frank Marshall Davis, the labor activist.

The theory, which departs from that of the more traditional “Obama-is-a-Kenyan” birthers, goes something like this: Obama’s grandfather was an undercover CIA agent who convinced Barack Obama Sr. to marry Obama’s mother to cover up the fact that she was pregnant with then-55-year-old Davis’ baby.

Yesterday, the chairman of the Alabama Republican Party, Bill Armistead, reportedly dipped his toe into the latter category, telling a Republican women’s group that a film that purveys that theory is “absolutely terrifying.” The report came from Mobile Press-Register political editor George Talbot, who attended the event.

Joel Gilbert, the director of the film, called “Dreams From My Real Father,” describes it thusly:

“Admittedly, at age 18, Obama arrived at Occidental College a committed revolutionary Marxist. ‘Dreams from My Real Father’ presents the case that Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party USA organizer and propagandist, was Obama’s real father, both biological and ideological, and indoctrinated Obama with a political foundation in Marxism and an anti-White world view.”

Armistead and the Alabama GOP didn’t immediately return our request for comment, but we’ll update if they do.

Via Right Wing Watch.

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/20/alabama_gop_chairman_goes_birther/

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 3:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


traffic flows pretty good over the bridge, it's south of the bridge and the on ramps right at the end of the bridge that is the problem. The bridges are not about ready to fall in the river and are rust buckets. They are in as good of shape as any in Portlandff, or so it has been reported. I think what is needed, is a bridge East and one West of the I5 bridges. I think they could be built a lot less than building a new I5 bridge that is not needed.

rincon1 — September 20, 2012 at 4:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Isn't that picture of the new bridge just so bucolic?? Judging by the scale of the vehicles it can't be more than about forty or fifty feet above the river.

Hey CRC!! How about showing a updated pic with the bridge at about 125 feet. And by all means show some river traffic. But leave out the Loo-Rail.

Why don't we hold and special election on just the Loo-Rail like Clackamas Co. did?? They were a little late and they got one track shoved down their throats. If we start now we can beat them at their own game. Before any track is laid for this folly it has to go before the voters. PERIOD!!!

JohnCasey — September 20, 2012 at 4:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


how bout that, the old randy goat is back....

soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 6:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 12:20 p.m.

My fellow forum dweller -

After all these years you've been going after me, not once have you figured out that I share a different perspective only in hopes of generating a discussion with others so that I may understand how and why the other person comes to their conclusion when they share it. A good example was my question to frobert regarding the comment to mrd. Whether you believe it or not, my thoughts I share are mine alone but others may have something similar cross their minds as well. Oftentimes, a select few on this forum (not naming names) choose to go into attack mode with labels and unfriendly suggestions only because they have no answers to my questions or no viable response to counter my argument points. In human nature, the natural response is "fight or flight." It is a constant process to avoid fight in the manner of insults or ridicule, and it is also a much friendlier atmosphere if people could refrain from such behavior. Flight from an argument in some cases is the only result...much like the terms of service by the Web Editor when they recommend not answering those who continually pursue what would be identified as "trollish behavior." That wouldn't even be a needed recommendation by the Web Editor if people would remain civil.

You stated on Sept. 19 @5:57 pm and I quote "Don't need your approval or opinion for anything, sell your wares somewhere else goldie."

It was my understanding that you thought I was trying to gain your approval and opinion as I was not. Because I vocally state when I agree with someone, that isn't because I'm looking for their approval. When you "recommended" I sell my wares somewhere else...you know what it was you were telling me and so does everybody else. So is it okay if you show an agreement with someone else, does that mean you are seeking their approval???

As I've said to you before and I say now...I have extended the olive branch of civility to you. Do you accept or shall we end this discussion here and now?

after all that she still does get it!! some people just like hear themselves talk.

soapbox4u — September 20, 2012 at 6:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


JohnCasey — September 20, 2012 at 4:51 p.m

Sorry John but they got two sets of tracks shoved down their throats. They got the one at Clackamas Town Center and the soon to be completed one to Milwaukie that snuck in under the wire before the vote. I'm guessing they will want to control an added line from one to the other or an extension to Oregon City.

hawkeye — September 20, 2012 at 7:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


From a couple of crazy dudes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi8bQd...

roger — September 20, 2012 at 7:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


That's going to be interesting to see how the Orange line loan pans out. The backers of the initiative are talking about taking the County Commissioners to court for that little move.

roger — September 20, 2012 at 7:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u, she has been back for a long time

rincon1 — September 20, 2012 at 7:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


On a different note:)

Usually the book is better than the movie, but not always.

Sometimes the movie is better than the book.

When it comes to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, it’s hard to imagine how the book(s) could have been made into a movie(s). I think the book(s) are better than the movies(s) but…Peter Jackson did an admirable job, and he and his backers took some big chances.

I see where the Hobbit, will be released in about three months. Looking forward to this.

[The Hobbit trailer][1]

[1]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOGsB9...

kn_dalai — September 20, 2012 at 7:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Rick Perry: 'Satan Runs Across The World,' Is Cause Of Church And State Separation (AUDIO)**

Former Republican party presidential candidate Governor Rick Perry speaks during a pro-life event called 'Treasure Life' at the Tampa Aquarium in Tampa, Florida on August 28, 2012. The Republican National Coalition for Life and FRC Action's event, 'Treasure Life,' honored the pro-life contributions of the former Republican party presidential candidates Sen. Rick Santorum, Rep. Michele Bachmann and Gov. Rick Perry for their advocacy for every stage of life, from conception to natural death. AFP P
Rick Perry criticized the separation of church and state Tuesday, saying "Satan" is the reason "people of faith should not be involved" with politics.

“Satan runs across the world with his doubt and with his untruths and what have you, and one of the untruths out there that is driven -- is that people of faith should not be involved in the public arena," Perry said on a conference call with former pastor Rick Scarborough as part of the “40 Days to Save America” campaign.

According to a transcript from Right Wing Watch, Perry chastised the "iron curtain" between church and state being "driven by the secularists":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/rick-perry-satan_n_1901280.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal


...and two time democrat gubernatorial candidate, Fred Phelps is homophobic and thinks President Obama is the Antichrist. Do you have a point?

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 8:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I thought Jesus said that all that followed his teachings were "no part of the world, just as he was no part of the world". Is that a truth or untruth. Involving themselves in the public arena would be being part of the world I would guess. It amuses me when the politicians try to inject or involve scripture into their ideas and talking points.

rincon1 — September 20, 2012 at 8:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hopefully this is the breakthrough it sounds like.

**Marijuana And Cancer: Scientists Find Cannabis Compound Stops Metastasis In Aggressive Cancers**

A pair of scientists at California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco has found that a compound derived from marijuana could stop metastasis in many kinds of aggressive cancer, potentially altering the fatality of the disease forever.

"It took us about 20 years of research to figure this out, but we are very excited," said Pierre Desprez, one of the scientists behind the discovery, to The Huffington Post. "We want to get started with trials as soon as possible."

The Daily Beast first reported on the finding, which has already undergone both laboratory and animal testing, and is awaiting permission for clinical trials in humans.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/marijuana-and-cancer_n_1898208.html

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 9:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I seriously doubt that the Obama administration will approve human trials. Much like epinephrine inhalers, some political positions are just too important to worry about the cost in human lives.

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 9:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Frobert,

Don’t forget about perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche. Perennial DEMOCRAT candidate LaRouche.

It is a joke to hear Democrats call Republicans “Fascist”, for any number of reasons. Among a host of other things, Democrat LaRouche advocated rounding up everyone who had AIDS, and putting them in isolation camps.

It’s hard to know where to start with this one.

It was in the ‘80’s, I think, maybe the '90's, that a “LaRouchie” won some state primary election. Not sure, but I think it was Minnesota, for Lt. Governor, or perhaps Attorney General. Whatever. The Democrat party, in that election, urged voters to vote for the Republican.

I remember watching some LaRouche infomercials on one of his presidential candidacies. More or less, it was hilarious. A room, like a college classroom, with maybe 6 or 7 seats filled. And this individual went on, and on, and on and on and…

One might wonder why Democrats think they’re “generous”, and then one might wonder why the likes of a LaRouche, was a Democrat, rather than A Republican.

OK. Here comes Hitler.

And then there is Hitler, who is thought of as a right wing extremist, but the man was elected in 1933, as German Chancellor, representing the National German Worker’s Socialist Party. Srongly supported by labor. If one knows anything at all about the man, he was hardly a free marketeer or Capitalist.

kn_dalai — September 20, 2012 at 9:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"And mrd, if you’re going to continue to post one quote after another, as you have often done, and have done once again at 10:08 a.m. perhaps you can cite your sources."

follow this link and you'll see the 1% are paying a smaller percentage of federal income tax now than previously. also note, this is strictly federal income tax. it does not include payroll taxes, sales tax, state income tax, local income tax-where applicable, gas taxes, etc., etc., and on and on. the folks at the bottom pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes than the "job creators".

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

you'll see the overall percentage of federal income tax paid as a percent of federal income taxes is on a downward trajectory for the rich folks, but if you wanna make up the difference and have the budget mess balanced on YOUR back while the rich folks skate (studies show if tax rates change/go up/etc) they simply move money away from taxable places to places where their money is not taxable like offshore accounts-ask Mittens about that one. They'll write off equestrian expenses such as buying and moving around a $100,000 horse, again ask Mittens et all. But hey, look at all the jobs Mittens and his ilk have created over the last 10 years or so based on their tax cuts. Absolutely zilch-and Obama be damned for extending the charade. Gotta go to bed......

mrd — September 20, 2012 at 9:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Man, post something that sounds positive, something that brings hope to a lot of folks and a couple grumpy old men politicize it and tear it down. Just. Plain. Sad.

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 9:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — September 20, 2012 at 9:38 p.m.

Anyone that thinks Hitler was "far right" has obviously never read anything the man wrote. He advocated nationalizing corporations and seizing profits and distributing them among the workers. Hitler in today's world would be slightly to the left of current democrats.

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 10:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


We keep hearing about the "birthers" and how these republicans are just offensive for believing the way they do. Now I see many posts from people on here who would have you believe that this is a common belief among republicans, I have never met a republican that believes that Obama was born in Kenya.

Where did the whole "birther" thing start? The first incarnation was democrats trying to invalidate the Vice Presidency of Republican Chester A Arthur. Followed by democrats trying to invalidate the candidacy of Barry Goldwater, George Romney and John McCain. I see a pattern here, it has been perpetuated by democrats for 130 years and than a few republicans say something similar and all republicans are somehow complicit?

frobert — September 20, 2012 at 10:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Currently we are living in the 21st century. Today is September 20. The year is 2012.

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 10:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86siAU...

Our current choice is between two center-left authoritarian parties, bent on world domination and oppression.

September 16, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 10:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal



**Orly Taitz, Birther, Sues To Remove Obama From Kansas Ballot**

Orly Taitz has an Oct. 3 hearing in Kansas on her birther lawsuit.
A Kansas judge has granted an Oct. 3 court hearing to birther queen Orly Taitz in her lawsuit that seeks to keep President Barack Obama off of the Sunflower State's ballot because of what she says are questions about his U.S. citizenship.

Taitz, a California dentist and lawyer, announced on her website Thursday evening that Kansas District Court Judge Larry Hendricks has granted her a hearing in her lawsuit that seeks to overturn a decision by the state Objections Board to keep Obama on the ballot. The Objections Board ruled Monday -- over Taitz' objection -- to drop plans to consider the removal of Obama from the ballot after Joe Montgomery, a Manhattan, Kan., resident, withdrew his challenge to the president's candidacy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/orly-taitz-birther-sues-kansas_n_1902366.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 10:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**FROBERT**

not a birther, but i WOULD like to get a look at the school records. i suspect our 'redistribute the wealth' prez listed himself as born abroad for the bennies.

DeeLittle — September 21, 2012 at 12:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


> "Obama's innovation was to expand the
> concept beyond simply building
> affordable apartments and high-rises.
> It encompassed a cradle-to-grave
> vision of providing for the material
> needs of the low-income families
> residing in the new housing, including
> their schools, child care, job
> training, medical coverage, clothing
> and food.
>
> In turn, the residents would campaign
> and vote for the officials advocating
> the partnerships, adding significantly
> to their political power."

the above is taken from an article, *"The Obama You Don't Know"* on the website washingtonexaminer.com. (link @ end of post). the website appears to be a partisan right-wing effort.

unlike the usual slanting and fabricating of 'facts' from partisan sites, this article is well-annotated with names, dates, newspaper articles and source materials they used to form their thesis.

gotta say, it's compelling. it's a dead-on description of what's happening to us, and why.

can anyone refute it....?
http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama#.UFsQT41lQ18#LPFWLP_S

DeeLittle — September 21, 2012 at 2:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


APPLE, PEN, CLOCK

Let me take a moment here and be totally serious about dementia.

I believe that any politician should be tested. ANNUALLY !!! As well as be tested for any misuse of any drugs or alcohol.

It seems that not one of them can open their mouth without inserting a foot ... or two.

Take MR. Molar. He say that the bridge WILL be built with Loo-Rail. Nothing else. Period. He seems to forget that it does NOT say that anywhere. The CRC want's to just shove it down our throats. Remember when I said bright and shiny things easily sway and distract them?? Here's more proof.

I would call him much worse but the big C does frown on that. He is being delusional about this bridge and Loo-Rail.

I was wrong about the tracks in Clackamas Co. I did forget they already had one. I still believe that we need to get a measure on the ballot to stop this madness. MR. Moeller is just too comfy in his ivory tower and has forgot the basics of politics 101. Don't piss off your minions.

I'm glad the coast guard has said they are the ones the CRC has to go through to get a permit. That pretty much says it all. The CRC has shown their true colors when they say it will be all right. That's just kicking the can down the road, so to speak.

Oh, and those three words at the beginning are used to test for Alzheimer disease. The doc say to remember these and he will ask what they were in about ten minutes. In my opinion most of these so called civic leaders can't pass this test.

JohnCasey — September 21, 2012 at 5:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*"after all that she still does get it!! some people just like hear themselves talk."*

Tryin' to figure out how anyone can hear themselves talk here on the forum, given the fact that this is a written blog and not a sound blog. **;p**

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 6:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 20, 2012 at 9:52 p.m.

I think you'll find there's more negativity rather than "Hope" for a better situation in our society right now, nailingit. You can plant a rose next to skunk cabbage, but the skunk cabbage will overpower it with the stench fragrance.

If you want a little more positive comment brought to the table, then by all means...be the first to begin the trend by refraining from posting links with obvious opinionated rhetoric with cut and pasted comments which support your political views. I'll do my part to be more selective in what I post as well. Maybe it'll start that trend you seek.

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 6:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Any possibility of this around here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqryps...

And this just because it was one of my favorite Beatles tunes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEnRVa...

roger — September 21, 2012 at 6:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, the possibilities are endless. I'm all for peace. With regards to the vision of the "Long haired, freaky people of the sixties...." that never goes away in spirit and soul.

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 6:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Something happened yesterday, late afternoon that has me questioning the motive.

Door bell rang, when I answered it, there stood a young man about my son's age (20-25), he asked to speak to my son.
When my son stepped outside to see what the young man wanted, he was asked these questions.

1. Will you being voting
2. Will you vote for Obama
3. Are you satisfied with Congress and how they do their job
4. Are you satisfied with the job Obama has done as president
5. Will you be voting for Inslee

Questions are fair enough, no problem with asking them, what I found odd was;

1. There is 3 of us registered voters in this home, only the youngest was asked to answer.
2. I noticed that the clip board he carried has a list of names and addresses in my neighborhood of families that have young voters in the homes.

Was this a poll of those who are say under the age of 30 in our area? Or was just a voters poll period?
If it were a poll for voters period, why wasn't the other voters in the home asked, I mean if they want an accurate count one would think that's what they'd do.

ELISI — September 21, 2012 at 7:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


ELISI, they're doing the same with telephone calls. I hope everyone realizes you don't have to answer these people. It's your right to deny any questions about who or what you will decide to place your vote.

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 7:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


That's..."It's your right to refuse to answer any questions about who or what you will decide to place your vote." Time for some coffee.

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 7:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 7:31 a.m.

We got rid of our land line 5 years ago, we all have cell phones, and we never get political calls.

frobert — September 21, 2012 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie @ 6:11- For some bizarre reason you've been trying to dictate what I post on these threads. Just weird. I'll post what I will. It's clear you can't wrap your head around what;s liberal and what's not anyway. It doesn't matter. Your trolling of me is not welcomed and neither are your comments.

If you don't care to read what I post then don't read them. Is this enough attention for you? I've been ignoring your posts for a reason. Again. Move on.

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 7:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


A repeat...

Some excerpts...looking over some nagging comments this def helped me to understand a bit more. I added (she) (her) to be inclusive and .. appropriate. Sock puppets to compliment a trolls argument is a story saved for another time, though often experienced here :(. Solid gold!

Internet Troll / Forum Troll "Netiquette Guidelines"

What is an Internet Troll/ Forum troll?

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" or "Message Board Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

A troll is trying to make us believe that he (she) is a genuine skeptic with no hidden agenda. He (she) is divisive and argumentative with need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth", flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people or provoking people to insult him (her). Troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.

While sometimes, he (she) may sound like a stupid, uninformed, ignorant poster, do not be deceived! Most trolls are highly intelligent people trying to hide behind a mask of stupidity and/or ignorance! They usually have an agenda.
A Troll is generally a person who is extremely skeptical of the main forum subject. He (she) is generally interested to make other forum members look stupid. A troll will sometimes use insults to provoke other people to insult him (her). Then, he (she) will complain to moderators of being insulted and will request that his (her) opponents get banned from further discussion.

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 7:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


He (she) in 90% of cases tries to start arguments and upset people.
Sometimes, he (she) is skeptical, trying to scare people, trying to plant fear in their hearts.
Sometimes, Internet troll is trying to spin conflicting information, is questioning in an insincere manner, flaming discussion, insulting people, turning people against each other, harassing forum members, ignoring warnings from forum moderators.
Trolls create a paranoid environment, such that a casual criticism by a new arrival can elicit a ferocious and inappropriate backlash.

The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction and not to respond to trolling messages. It is well known that most people don't read messages that nobody responds to, while 99% of forum visitors first read the longest and the largest threads with the most answers.

Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse. For some reason, trolls do not feel they are bound by the rules of courtesy or social responsibility.

It would be nice if everybody was so easy-going, but the sad fact is that trolls do discourage people. Established posters may leave a message board because of the arguments that trolls ignite, and lurkers (people who read but do not post) may decide that they do not want to expose themselves to abuse and thus never get involved.

Another problem is that the negative emotions stirred up by trolls leak over into other discussions. Normally affable people can become bitter after reading an angry interchange between a troll and his victims, and this can poison previously friendly interactions between long-time users.

When trolls are ignored they step up their attacks, desperately seeking the attention they crave. Their messages become more and more foul, and they post ever more of them. Alternatively, they may protest that their right to free speech is being curtailed.
When trolls find that their efforts are being successfully resisted, they often complain that their right to free speech is being infringed.

When a troll attacks a message board, he (she) generally posts a lot of messages. Even if his (her) messages are not particularly inflammatory, they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations (this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel.

The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls.

By posting such a message, you let the troll know that you know what he (she) is, and that you are not going to get dragged into his (her) twisted little hobby.

Read whole article: http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 7:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Gee...what are the odds???

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 **at 6:46 p.m.**

ELISI — September 19, 2012 **at 6:47 p.m.**

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 **at 6:23 p.m.**

ELISI — September 19, 2012 **at 6:23 p.m.**

goldenoldie — September 19, 2012 **at 7:07 p.m.**

ELISI — September 19, 2012 **at 7:08 p.m.**

goldenoldie — September 20, 2012 **at 3:18 p.m.**

ELISI — September 20, 2012 **at 3:19 p.m.**

Again you "two", your comments are not welcomed on this end. A creepy soul indeed.

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations (this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel.
nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 7:48 a.m*

I could pick several points made in your posts that also point directly at you nailingit, but I will use only the one above.

Go back weeks and look at how many posts you have made,one right after another all one sided political rhetoric. One can say this action is also "monopolizing" "flooding"
Is this another instant where pot is calling kettle?

ELISI — September 21, 2012 at 8:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Marijuana And Cancer: Scientists Find Cannabis Compound Stops Metastasis In Aggressive Cancers"

Combinations of THC and CBD have proven to be proapototic (tells cells to die), antiangiogenic (inhibits blood vessel growth) and antimitogenic (inhibits cell devision) in cancers.

In a South Carolina university a study is currently underway in treating leukemia with a THC synthetic.

In the study mentioned in the article it reads the researchers intend to synthesize the CBD in order to circumvent issues with the CSA (Controlled Substances Act).

Another phytocannabinoid CBDV (cannabidivarin) is showing promise in the treatment of epilepsy. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/14/news/la-sn-cannabis-cbdv-epilepsy-20120914

GW Pharmaceuticals already has a phytocannabinoid medicine being marketed in Europe and Canada for treating MS. Sativex is in FDA Phase III trials here in the U.S. Sativex is near equal parts of whole plant THC and CBD. It's a peppermint sublingual spray. How they intend to get around the CSA I've not a clue.

Drift — September 21, 2012 at 8:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie/elisi- Kinda like your 23 posts within a few hour period when frobert was attacking manthou. You are energized by negativity. Something that's been noticed for some time now.

Go bake bake a zucchini loaf or something. Whatever it is you do. Just leave me alone. Please.

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, I have offered before and will again, meet me and see if you still feel that I am Goldenoldie.

Maybe she might even agree to met with you to make you see that we are two totally different people. I can't speak for her, but myself am tired of your constant belittling and trying to make it appear that we are the same person.

We both have told enough about our lives that anyone smart enough can figure out we are not the same person.

Do I need to remind you;
1. I am 60 yrs old
2. Married 42 yrs
3. 2 children
4. 2 grandchildren
5. 1 child lives in Alaska, 1 here
6. I have family here in Vancouver, Idaho, Utah, Ca, Michigan, Alaska, and just about every state in the southern part of the US.
Yes I like gardening, yes, I still grow veggies in my backyard each year. SO what! So do many other people! Yep I have a dog, she is a mini schnauzer. I have a parrot he is an Indian Ringneck
Yes I bake a lot. Yes I cook from scratch. Anything else you want to know? Like have I ever broken a bone? Yeah I have, a toe and my foot.
Am I a repub or a dem, I am a registered repub but I vote either side, depends on the candidate and issue.

Just because two or more people do and are interested in things the same, beliefs are close etc doesn't mean they are the same person.

You really need to step down from that cloud your on, open your eyes and mind and might be surprised at what really is going on around you.
OR are you doing this all to run others off that don't agree with you on your way of politics?

ELISI — September 21, 2012 at 8:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Interesting! Fair and balanced? You decide. :))

**Study: Fox News Turned Congresspeople More Conservative**

A new study has concluded that Fox News turned members of Congress more conservative in its early years.

The network is an increasing favorite of academics examining its influence over political life. The most recent study, which was first highlighted by BuzzFeed, comes from two Vanderbilt University professors and was prepared for a workshop at Yale. In it, the authors examined the effect they think Fox News during its first few years of existence:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/fox-news-congress-conservative_n_1903308.html

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — September 21, 2012 at 7:34 a.m.

That's what ELISI had said too about land lines. I intend to keep mine, so I'm using my caller ID...the sad thing is, they know we won't answer, so they're asking specifically for one of the voters in the household. They're also utilizing numbers which show up as "Out of Area," and for a family who has relatives who actually live out of the area, they're getting pretty sneaky in catching us. Now...all unrecognized calls are ignored and any who "catches" us will be screened before stating whether or not a person is available to talk.

BTW, we also have cell phones...have even received them on the cell phones, probably because the number was listed at one of the "open houses." So much for giving a contact number any more!!!

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 9:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:58 a.m.

I don't know which is worse, the study claiming that one news organization has moved the country towards conservatism or the comments advocating suppression of free speech and freedom of the press that does not support their view of liberalism.

frobert — September 21, 2012 at 9:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 7:38 a.m.

Nope...not dictating. You have the right to say as you will. I was merely suggesting we all work together to reduce the negativity on the forum.

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 7:46 a.m.

Glad you posted the definition of internet trolling. It's always a good reminder. Others may perceive what you are doing as trolling so you might remind yourself of the definition.

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:02 a.m.

I truly do not have to dignify your suspicions with a response but have decided to anyways. Just because you have two women on the forum, living separate lives who just happen to post near the same time on occasion as the other, doesn't mean there's a correlation. I am flattered that you think I am ELISI, but I am not. She's a mother, a grandmother, a gardener...and a member of this community who isn't going to let ignorant personal attacks get in the way of her stating her opinion. I admire her for that. Guess what, nailingit...I admit there's quite a similarity between us but we are two separate human beings and believe it or not...there's also several differences which make us who we are. Bet that bothers you, huh! To think there's *at least 2 women* in our community who will stand up to oppressive souls, who aren't afraid to step up to the plate to fight the persecution through terse verbiage and share their thoughts and opinions. What is *this* world coming to??? Bet you like 'em barefoot, pregnant and mute, huh!

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 10:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:14 a.m.

Shame on me for speaking up when I read posts of negativity just because I like my glass of water half full instead of half empty! Tsk Tsk!

Don't convince yourself into thinking I'm only directing my posts to you, Nail...as I am not.

You must've been reading my mind this morning. Just finishing up the last zucchini loaf this morning. Time to acquire some more zucch's at the local farm since my vines no longer have any bearing fruit.

Leave you alone??? Funny, I have never met you that I know of...have never seen you or spoken to you...only see words on a forum... and as long as those words go against what I believe in and are written in half truths...and we have a right to share in open discussion in a civil manner, seems there's no harm in it. At 6:11 this morning, I offered you a chance for both of us to get the ball rolling and turn the discussion around in a positive direction because of your comment last night at 9:52pm...

...and this is what I get in return? A plethora of written "poor me" attacks???

So much for civility on your part. If you wish to discuss matters in an open forum and don't want to read responses from others and haven't gray barred those you don't care to see, well then maybe the open forum isn't the place for you. It's apparent you aren't reading the terms of service or community guidelines as of lately.

It is said that when you accuse someone of something, it's usually because you are guilty of doing the same thing yourself. Something to think about for all of us, wouldn't you say???

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


ELISI @8:29...

You mean to tell me you have no relatives in Australia, Austria, Germany, Zimbabwe or Greece as well??? The only birds I have at my home are the wild ones who come to my feeder...sweet little goldfinches that are changing colors into their winter plumage, nuthatches, two types of chickadees, stellar and scrub jays, house finches and bushtits. Oh yes...and the flickers, downy woodpeckers and a few towhees.

The way others were making us sound, we were one in the same. Too bad so sad for Vancouver...they've got at least two of us!!! Here's a conspiracy theory...maybe we were cloned!!!

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 10:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal



LOL Golden, must add DeeLittle to the equation also since shhhhhhhhh (whispering) there are some who think she is part of a Sybil persona, or is it The Three faces of Eve?
Next thing you know they will add frobert into the mix as well as a few others! LOL

Sounds to me if someone has been out looking under way too many rocks..

ELISI — September 21, 2012 at 11:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldie, as per your 10:05 comment, last line. Barefoot? not a bad idea i think it is good for everyone, good for circulation. Pregnant naw, too many undisciplined brats around now. Mute? aww man yeah, wouldn't that be a blessing. Of course that would include anyone who is so biased toward one side that they can't find anything at all good on the other side,be it people or issues.

rincon1 — September 21, 2012 at 12:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Priceless! :))

**Herman Cain Takes Shot At Mitt Romney, Says He Would Have 'Substantial Lead' Over Obama**

Herman Cain took a shot at Mitt Romney on Friday, stating that if he were the Republican presidential nominee, he would have a "substantial lead" over President Barack Obama.

**“The reason is quite simple: I have some depth to my ideas,"** Cain told a crowd of more than 300 at the University of Florida as part of his “College Truth Tour.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/herman-cain-mitt-romney_n_1903148.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 12:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Paul Ryan booed at AARP conference**

Speaking to an audience of seniors in New Orleans, Paul Ryan was booed after he called for a repeal of President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, and faced one of his frostiest crowds since joining the GOP ticket.

“I had a feeling there would be mixed reaction, so let’s get into it,” Ryan said at the AARP’s annual conference.

As Ryan asserted one of the main underpinnings of his candidacy — doing away with the federal health care law — the crowd chanted “no” and booed the Wisconsin representative more than once.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81490.html#ixzz278NE6oZA

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 12:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hey nailingit} call it the brick wall syndrome. Brick walls don't comprehend stuff. Best bet is to paint graffiti on the wall and call it art.

soapbox4u — September 21, 2012 at 1:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Mrd @9:40 p.m.

It’s interesting to note, the way outlooks are often divided between the “individual”, and the “collective”. I have raised this point repeatedly and repeatedly. It is at the heart of the difference between Right and Left. When it comes to money. The most basic question of all, as far as I’m concerned, is what the purpose of government is. There should be no question, but that the founding documents of the Federal government, were premised on Locke’s social contract theory, i.e. government is instituted to provide the individual, protection from transgressions from others, and to provide for the common defense. It is, and was, a libertarian outlook. It also used to be called Liberal. It is now known, by those who care to look at the whole political thing, as Classical Liberalism.

While some like to think it is “progressive”, their idea is that government is instituted to take care of people, and determine wealth distribution, and other things of a similar nature. It is a socialist perspective. As far as I’m concerned, it is a valid political viewpoint, but one which I think undermines the nature of individual liberty and one in which the cure is worse than the disease. In this age, such an outlook is now called Liberal, which is really socialist, Be careful what you wish for. In the vein of legitimate viewpoints, I will also note, that Jefferson was a strong proponent of public education.

Your comments of 9:40 p.m. are looking at things collectively. The wealthy may well be paying a lesser percentage collectively, than before, but that is not the same thing as saying they are paying at a lesser tax rate than others. The Left’s outlook is to “soak the rich”. By its very nature, it is a dogma of creating government sanctioned factions.

Please review my previous comments, note my question on “benchmarks”, in term s of tax rates, and see that my point is one of looking at political ideas in terms of envy. And of mob mentality.

kn_dalai — September 21, 2012 at 2:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Can anybody explain to me why it is that the US Postal Service has been screaming how broke they are but they managed to contribute $100,000.00 to President Obama's campaign??? It's right there in black and white on the Federal Elections Commission website.

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 2:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — September 20, 2012 at 10:05 p.m.

Absolutely correct.

The Leftists permeate academia, and disproportionally write the books. Much can be said about this, which I covered in a post quite some time ago. Hitler as a uber National Socialist, has been transformed into Hitler as a Right wing extremist. Look at the Totalitarians of the 20th century. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro. And let’s not forget about Khrushev and his shoe banging on the table, and “We will bury the West” . …

So just what’s the difference between this Hitler character, and all of the rest?

One might wonder at why Hitler was a virulent anti-communist. Don’t know. But I’ve seen it suggested, I think it was in Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, that The USSR was based on Marxist dogma, and Marx was a Jew. Also, Maybe Hitler didn’t like the competition.

Politically, these characters were all about government control.

kn_dalai — September 21, 2012 at 2:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Anyone else getting a kick out of this forum this week? #pplhaveissues

I still find it funny, half of the time, you get censored for saying fart or crap but douche-bag is allowed.

mxfun118 — September 21, 2012 at 2:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


rincon1 — September 21, 2012 at 12:04 p.m.

Political bias shows its ugly face more around election time than any other time of year. Symptoms are poor vision and hearing loss...and a lot more vocal tirades. Now if *bias* could only be mute!!!

goldenoldie — September 21, 2012 at 2:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yes or at least show civility, but that seams to be an impossibility for the radicals and fanatics.

rincon1 — September 21, 2012 at 2:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soap @ 1:43- :) Sometimes there's not enough paint. When I wake up and look in on the forum and somebody is trashing our President by accusing him of lying on his college transcripts, then someone goes out of their way to compare my posts to cabbage stench, it's a little too much.

Amazing that some empathize with this kind of garbage. But as the song goes, all in all, we're just another brick in the wall.

What are the odds??? :)

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 3:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


If nobody's had their laugh for the day check this out. The "Fox and Friends" segment is great! :)))

**'SNL' Election Special Scorecard: Mitt Romney In The Satirical Crosshairs**

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/snl-election-special-scorecard_b_1902196.html

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 4:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 3:51 p.m

Trashing our President? By suggesting he should release transcripts? I don't see any point in disclosing his transcripts but that is in no way "trashing" him.

Now if we go back four years, you did plenty of trashing our current President at the time. The funny part is most of your criticism of Bush at the time was for policies that Obama has expanded.

We enjoy freedom of speech if you question Bush or Dee questions Obama, it is perfectly legitimate.

frobert — September 21, 2012 at 4:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Those who hide truths behind freedom of speech narratives should talk to Lady Ann! ;))

**Ann Romney To Mitt Critics: 'Stop It'**

WASHINGTON -- Ann Romney rebuked Republican critics of her husband in two media appearances on Thursday, telling them to "stop it."

The wife of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, during a sit-down interview with CBS 58 in Milwaukee, was asked about the second-guessing within the GOP's tent over the campaign.

"You know there is always sniping and everyone always thinks they are the best critic, and they know this and they know that," she said. "And you know what, it is really amazing to me that people forget that what this election really is about is the economy."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/ann-romney-mitt-stop-it_n_1902225.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 4:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit @ 3:51

Words said do not have any power over a person until power is given. The trolls and suckpuppets are nothing more than empty entitites on a screen and when unacknowledged have no power. Of course, poking fun is fun.

Keep up the great job of information dissemenation!! Have a fantastic weekend too!

soapbox4u — September 21, 2012 at 5:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Great words of wisdom soapbox4u. You have a great weekend also!

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 5:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Something that just broke a few hours ago. Seems the Libyan people are holding demonstrations protesting the actions of the extremists who murdered Ambassador Stevens. Reports say at least 30,000 marched peacefully - stating their displeasure with what happened and mourning the loss of someone they respected and considered a friend. And a group of several hundred stormed the compound of the group thought to have backed the attack on the Ambassador, and set fire to their building.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/libyans-hold-giant-march-demanding-militias-disband-in-wake-of-attack-on-us-consulate/2012/09/21/9203e21c-0406-11e2-9132-f2750cd65f97_story.html

Other reports say the gov't has arrested 8 of the extremist group that they know were involved - so far.

Just maybe Pres Obama took the correct steps by backing the Libyan gov't and allowing them to take the lead in bringing the murderers to justice? If we'd have gone in force to do the job ourselves, we'd have more of the Muslim world hating us. This way - just maybe more over there will stand up and say "enough is enough".

roger — September 21, 2012 at 6:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I think if they would shut the Mullahs up, that would be a great step foreword in stopping the violence over there in all the Arab countries

rincon1 — September 21, 2012 at 6:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 21, 2012 at 6:12 p.m.

Maybe he DID do the right thing. I'm pretty sure he did. You have to let Libya work it out and I think they will.

I've been busy lately but just browsing the posts, it looks like it's been somewhat of a pissing contest here with no real winners but some wearing cranky pants.

hawkeye — September 21, 2012 at 6:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk - I know - Lots of conspiracy theory and everyone yelling at everyone else. If I'm going to play that game, I'll go to the facebook side and harass Jim Moeller, Lew Waters and John Laird.

Anyhow (seeing as how Nails is one who's been distracted a bit), I'm going to fill the gap and put out some stuff off of Huff Post.

Where's that economic recovery we've been hearing about?

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/09/20/bank-of-america-to-cut-16000-jobs-by-year-end-report-says/?icid=maing-grid7|maing6|dl4|sec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D208888

roger — September 21, 2012 at 7:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And how long are we going to support this corporation? I've got an idea - the Chinese are protesting against the Japanese, and refusing to buy/drive their cars. Let's have GM ship the Volts to China, and let the Japanese send more cars here - as long as they sell them at a lower price.

http://green.autoblog.com/2012/09/20/forbes-columnist-takes-stab-at-gms-scams-with-chevy-vo/?icid=maing-grid7|maing6|dl7|sec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D208671

roger — September 21, 2012 at 7:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Looks like the old folks down in NOLA don't like being called on the dole either.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/paul-ryan-booed-aarp_n_1903937.html?icid=maing-grid7|maing6|dl15|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D209074

roger — September 21, 2012 at 7:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


These 6 million estimated to be willing to face the fine are the people the gov't claims can afford medical insurance but refuse to buy it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/health-care-tax-penalty_n_1898005.html?utm_hp_ref=business&icid;=maing-grid7|maing6|dl39|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D208152

"And the budget office analysis found that nearly 80 percent of those who'll face the penalty would be making up to or less than five times the federal poverty level. Currently that would work out to $55,850 or less for an individual and $115,250 or less for a family of four."

"Average penalty: about $1,200 in 2016."

"Health insurance is expensive, with employer-provided family coverage averaging nearly $15,800 a year for a family and $4,300 for a single plan."

You know, I can see the logic in paying the penalty instead.

Where's that damned Socialism the Repubs and neocons are screaming about??? This health care act is little more than a sop to the insurance companies. Where are the price controls on corporate medicine? Where is the affordable health care for all?

roger — September 21, 2012 at 7:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Romney released his 2011 tax return.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/mitt-romney-tax-returns-released_n_1904242.html

Now, I'm sure a lot of people are going to focus on his money going to off shores, etc. But there's something else there that really pisses me off.

Romney's income was $13,696,951 in 2011, yet he listed no income from wages, salaries or tips. Couldn't the SOB get out there and earn a couple of bucks like the rest of us do???

(He did claim $260,390 in directors fees and $190,350 in speaking fees; I wonder why these aren't considered wages? I mean, he did have to work - sort of - to get them, didn't he?)

roger — September 21, 2012 at 7:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal



My Zappa contribution for the night.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wqoVSADKxc

roger — September 21, 2012 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Wall Street Rolling Back Another Key Piece of Financial Reform**

Wall Street lobbyists are awesome. I’m beginning to develop a begrudging respect not just for their body of work as a whole, but also for their sense of humor. They always go right to the edge of outrageous, and then wittily take one baby-step beyond it. And they did so again last night, with the passage of a new House bill (HR 2827), which rolls back a portion of Dodd-Frank designed to protect cities and towns from the next Jefferson County disaster.

Jefferson County, Alabama was the most famous case – the city of Birmingham went bankrupt after being bribed and goaded into taking on billions of dollars of toxic swap deals – but in fact it was just one of hundreds of similar examples of localities being duped into suicidal financial deals by rapacious banks and financial companies. The Denver school system, for instance, got clobbered when it opted for an exotic swap deal pushed by J.P. Morgan Chase (the same villain in Jefferson County, incidentally) and then-school superintendent/future U.S. Senator Michael Bennet, that ended up costing the school system tens of millions of dollars. As was the case in Jefferson County, the only way out of the deal involved a massive termination fee that might have been even more destructive than the deal itself.

To deal with this problem, the Dodd-Frank Act among other things included a simple reform. It required the financial advisors of municipalities to do two things: register with the SEC, and accept a fiduciary duty to respect the best interests of the taxpayers they are advising.

Sounds simple, right? But Wall Street couldn’t have that. After all, if companies are required to have a fiduciary responsibility to cities and towns, how in the world can they screw cities and towns? The idea was a veritable axe-blow to the banks’ municipal advisory businesses.

So what did Wall Street lobbyists and trade groups like SIFMA (the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association) do? Well, they did what they’ve been doing to Dodd-Frank generally: they Swiss-cheesed the law with a string of exemptions. The industry proposal that ended up being HR 2827 created several new loopholes for purveyors of swaps and other such financial products to cities and towns. Here’s how the pro-reform group Americans for Financial Reform described the loopholes (emphasis mine):

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/wall-street-rolling-back-another-key-piece-of-financial-reform-20120920#ixzz27AEWk3Be

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Bob Dylan was ahead of his time - he even protested music videos before everyone started making them!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKfrjk6suAQ

roger — September 21, 2012 at 8:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 21, 2012 at 7:33 p.m.

That is what I have been screaming. The ACA is health insurance regulation, not healthcare reform. It doesn't address the cost of care at all.

Even though many believe otherwise, I think the best part of the ACA was the exclusion of the public option. I know that this would drive many providers to abandon their practice. The reason being that a government run policy (such as Tricare, something I know too well) has determined a cost to each procedure it covers. If the provider charges more, then they are SOL. They will only recieve what Tricare is willing to pay, and they aren't allowed to collect the difference from the customer.

I know that many will say this is good. Doctors, in some cases, are earning way more than they need to anyway.

And a question for anyone who knows. Does the ACA dictate what policy a provider is to accept? I know that providers are known for determining they will accept from some insurance companies, but not from others. Does the ACA even address this issue?

danabwoodley — September 21, 2012 at 8:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:06 p.m.

Damn, Nails, you just put me in a bad mood. Now I'm going to have to see what this House bill is all about.

Question, though - this isn't law yet, is it? Don't they have to send it up to the Senate so Harry can file 13 it?

roger — September 21, 2012 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- They might be tearing apart our Country, but at least the House is doing something! :))

nailingit — September 21, 2012 at 8:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Obama is doing things also, undeclared wars, domestic surveillance, assassinating citizens, crushing medical marijuana and suppressing civil liberties in general. He campaign slogan should be that he outBushes Bush.

frobert — September 21, 2012 at 8:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — September 21, 2012 at 8:11 p.m.

Dana, I also use TRICARE, which is pretty much Medicare with a different cover on it. The only time I've been denied service because of my insurance was by Vancouver Radiology.

The problem isn't so much the doctors - it's the whole field. This isn't kindly old Doc Smith that everyone in town went to see. It's corporate medicine - doctors belong to medical groups, every service is billed separately so they can get around the visit cost share limit, prices are outrageously inflated (supposedly to make up for the ones who don't pay), and blah blah blah. And they were right there along side the insurance companies paying off all those people in DC to make sure we got what we ended up with.

Lots of countries have some form of socialized medicine. Isn't Canada always being used as an example - people coming here because the Canadian system sucks? Funny - I've met a few Canadians in my time, and they all seem pretty content with the treatment they get.

roger — September 21, 2012 at 8:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


ok.

i admit it.

there are only two of us in the forum.

you post under your regular nick, and i use all the others.

DeeLittle — September 21, 2012 at 8:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"So what did Wall Street lobbyists and trade groups like SIFMA (the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association) do? Well, they did what they’ve been doing to Dodd-Frank generally: they Swiss-cheesed the law with a string of exemptions. The industry proposal that ended up being HR 2827 created several new loopholes for purveyors of swaps and other such financial products to cities and towns. Here’s how the pro-reform group Americans for Financial Reform described the loopholes."

So whodunnit? It's not as if one party or the other accomodates these thiefs. Both do. Actually, they've already told the sinate committee to FO and have ignored a letter from the sinate telling these guys the sinate would really like to have them obey and respond to the Frank/Dodd (?) act. The last I heard, the sinate and the White House were basically told to FO. So who do you really think has the power, the hammer? It ain't the government, it's been purchased already. But the Wall St boys-that own our puppet politicians-will take care of us all. When we're on our knees at their behest. Oh, by the way, turn over your retirement funds to these guys. THey'll take GOOD care of your money, and take their 5% even if they can't touch the market average, but hey, you can't lose a bunch without donating to these thiefs. Someone's gonna rip you off, might as well be Prudential, etc. REad your prospectus.

mrd — September 21, 2012 at 8:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> Keep up the great job of information dissemenation!! -- soapbox4u — September 21, 2012 at 5:21 p.m.

“Information dissemenation”. My Gawd. Then of course, you must be absolutely thrilled by Fox News, and their “information dissemination”. And then there's Rush. No, probably not, but I'm sure that Mother Jones must be right up there with "information dissemenation" Bias taints one’s view. And extreme bias taints one’s view extremely.

(I won’t bother to make a point out of your misspelling. But if it was my misspelling, I imagine one of your cohorts would make an issue out of it.)

kn_dalai — September 21, 2012 at 8:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 21, 2012 at 8:38 p.m.

Well my response to everyone who sees a socialized program somewhere they like, then go there to live. To socialize a program is to get closer to socialism. Socialism suppresses freedom.

Is our system perfect? Not by a long shot. I may struggle, but I do so as a free man.

danabwoodley — September 21, 2012 at 9:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Lots of countries have some form of socialized medicine. Isn't Canada always being used as an example - people coming here because the Canadian system sucks? Funny - I've met a few Canadians in my time, and they all seem pretty content with the treatment they get.

my daughter-in-law's grandfather moved to Canada for that reason-better, cheaper health care. He was originally from Canada, then returned when he retired.

As long as health care and health insurance are treated as a for-profit commodity, don't look for any improvement. And as people such as Ryan rail for privatization and vouchers, beware-they're simply trying to make sure corporate America can get in on the action and skim billions for profit. And with their money and control, beware.

If the health care system in this country is so great, how come no other country uses it? It is true that some of the best, cutting edge treatments are available in this country, if you can afford them.

mrd — September 22, 2012 at 8:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Dana...glad to see you're back posting on the forum.

..

DeeLittle, I am you and me and mxfun118 and ELISI and Dana and Crazytrain and...and...and...??? I have to say...that's actually a nice compliment from those who think we're one in the same!

Two posters on the forum??? That many??? LOL...it's an improvement!

goldenoldie — September 22, 2012 at 8:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Why aren't the voices of patriotic people on the right denouncing this?

**Voter ID Laws Take Aim At College-Student Voters**

In Tennessee, a new law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls explicitly excludes student IDs.

In Wisconsin, college students are newly disallowed from using university-provided housing lists or corroboration from other students to verify their residence.

Florida's reduction in early voting days is expected to reduce the number of young and first-time voters there.

..

None of the new laws blocks student voting outright -- although in New Hampshire, Republican lawmakers almost passed a bill that would have banned out-of-state students from casting a ballot. (The leader of the State House, Bill O'Brien, was caught on tape explaining how the move was necessary to stop students from "basically doing what I did when I was a kid: voting as a liberal.")

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/22/voter-id-laws-gop-college-student_n_1791568.html

nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 8:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Blame Fox, not Mitt**

*Romney's run an awful campaign. But his real problem is most Americans reject the Fox News/Limbaugh fairy tale*

There are two parts to this: First, the idea that the sluggish recovery would lead to an easy Republican win is just wrong. There’s a fair amount of disagreement among political scientists and others who construct election prediction models, but the general consensus is that the current economy suggests a relatively close race, with Obama perhaps a mild favorite for re-election. To the extent that people believe, however, that this was Romney’s race to lose – a belief that seems to be especially popular among conservatives – the current Obama lead seems to cry out for an explanation. Therefore, it’s natural that Romney and his campaign get blamed.

The second part is that Romney himself, or at least his campaign, seems to have massively misunderstood how the economy is perceived. That’s perhaps due to the conservative closed-information feedback loop. If most of your information comes through Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, you might think that the economy was just fine or maybe a bit on the weak side until January 2009 and that it has gone from bad to worse since then. Certainly, that’s what Republican rank-and-file voters seem to think. In the meantime, while Democrats are optimistic about the economy and Independents are moderately pessimistic (but far less so than in 2008), economic confidence among Republicans is as low as it was back in the nightmare winter of 2008-2009.

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/22/blame_fox_not_mitt/

nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 9:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 8:37 a.m.

Possibly because driver licenses have identifying microchips and college photo ID doesn't...rendering photo ID easier to replicate???

Curious...it had to be mentioned how a bill was "almost" passed??? Is that really news or is that an attempted negative hit by the writer???

Although I will not commit to who it is I am voting for, I will speak for myself and will state that I believe state-approved voter identification should be required.

goldenoldie — September 22, 2012 at 9:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Funny stuff! Electorate dynamics haven't changed much in four years! :))

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-october-7-2008/the-stupid-vote

nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — September 21, 2012 at 9:04 p.m.

Social Security is socialism.

Our military retirement pay and disability pay are socialism.

Standards and control of education systems is socialism.

TRICARE, Medicare, Medicaid - all socialism.

Job retraining programs and unemployment compensation are socialism.

OSHA and other safety/health controls on businesses are socialism.

Should I continue?

Lots of countries are socialist to one degree or other - Germany, Canada, and most of the Scandinavian countries for example. I'm not hearing complaints about loss of freedom from their citizens.

Complete freedom is anarchy. I'll take socialism. And most of these discussions on the pros and cons of any -ism tend to overlook one important fact. There is, and rarely (if ever) has been, a perfect translation of that -ism into practice. They've all been modified to meet the needs of where they're being put into practice. For example, do you really believe Stalin's USSR was representative of what Karl Marx envisioned?

roger — September 22, 2012 at 10:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- Sometimes it's hard to see the forest for the trees. I was hoping DBW would give some follow up on what it is he meant @ 9:04. Here's an article that lays the foundation, for what I'm sure many of us were thinking after reading his post.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/07/19/welfare_state

nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 10:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This is why everything costs so much -

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21602133/aurora-theater-shooting-victims-file-suits-against-cinemark

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" -- Shakespeare, Henry VI.

roger — September 22, 2012 at 10:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Bill Maher at his best! If you enjoy excellent political humor than this is a must see! Hysterical!

**Bill Maher Slams Undecided Swing State Voters And The Media For Celebrating Them (VIDEO)**

In every election we have to consider the oh-so-important undecided and swing state voters, like this election's 5% of people who still don't know which candidiate they're going to vote for but can ultimately decide the election. On Friday night's "Real Time," Bill Maher kicked those undecideds right off their high pedestal and asked why the media gives low-information voters so much attention.

With less than two months until the election, Maher advises those who still don't know who they're voting for to "stay home" on Nov. 6, because they probably won't be able to find their polling places. He doesn't understand why undecideds such as "Octomom" Nadya Suleman are being celebrated or painted as more discerning than the rest of us when Barack Obama and Mitt Romney couldn't be more different.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/22/bill-maher-undecided-swing-state-voters_n_1905886.html

nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 10:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Wow, Bill Maher is still a self involved jerk who thinks his opinion is the only one that matters.

frobert — September 22, 2012 at 12:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 22, 2012 at 10:13 a.m.

Matters of degree make a difference.

Employees pay into Social Security, Medicare and Unemployment funds.

Employees of NASA the CDC or a states road department receive compensation for services provided.

Retirement pay etc, is part of the employment package.

Jefferson supported public education, and I would imagine that just about everyone does, although the efficacy of today’s public education is in question.

Certainly, some sort of reasonable regulation on business, over safety and health issues are proper. But does government have a right to tell an employer how much they have to pay, and a host of other things?

The Wagner Act of 1935, stripped employers of their own freedom of association.

The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, forced a tax on mills in order to pay farmers NOT to grow crops. It was overturned in U.S. v. Butler, but congress found a way to get around it and passed a later act.

In Wicard v. Filburn, SCOTUS decided that the Federal government has the right to prevent a farmer from growing crops for his own use, by virtue of the Commerce Clause.

As far as the USSR goes, no that is certainly not what Marx envisioned, but the question should be asked as to just how things got there, and why the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics eventually collapsed. This country, and a host of European countries are on the financial brink. Europeans can’t blame that on bloated military spending, nor do I believe they can blame it on undertaxation.

kn_dalai — September 22, 2012 at 1:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


How about talking about *local* news instead of copying and pasting stuff on here all day long. Have this be a forum instead of "ooo someone is attacking me mentality." Politics suck and you are all old. (Except Golden- I like her)

Democrats are like dingleberries- they stick to your backside and are annoying. They don't have balls, they are completely whipped and feminized, and they cry if someone isn't politically correct or is attacking them.

mxfun118 — September 22, 2012 at 4:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — September 22, 2012 at 1:01 p.m.

But who determines when that "matter of degrees" makes a difference?

Actually, I can agree with much of what you said. My response to Dana was based on his complaint that socialism suppresses freedom. The only thing suppressed under socialism is capitalism. And there is an important difference between most socialist models and communism. Under communism "to each according to need" applies. Under socialism, this becomes "to each according to input". This allows for accumulation for oneself without controlling the means of production.

A side note - The USMC is the only service that actually pays retirement. For the rest of us, this is a retainer; we're subject to recall because we accept this payment.

roger — September 22, 2012 at 5:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mxfun118 — September 22, 2012 at 4:35 p.m. -- "How about talking about local news instead of...."

No problem here - I spend a lot of time on the facebook side because I'd rather talk local issues.

What about the FAA planning to restrict flights from Pearson Field, due to some sort of perceived interference with PDX?

As Steve Carroll notes, this is probably a precursor to routing more flights using PDX's runway 10L directly over downtown Vancouver. The FAA has approved 2.5 mile spacing for plans landing on this runway - the implication is that every few moments another passenger liner will be flying at about 1100 feet over downtown Vancouver while landing at PDX.

What does this do for downtown revitalization plans? As anyone who's been at an event at Esther Shore Park can attest to, all conversation (short of shouting) ceases when a plane is going overhead. What if this becomes a common occurrence? I suspect the plans for south of the rail - highrises for offices and apartments, boutique type shops, outdoor dining, etc. - will get shelved; I can't imagine someone wanting to move under a flight path.

roger — September 22, 2012 at 5:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Wow!! I'm not an Oregon State fan, but they've looked pretty impressive beating to ranked teams in two weeks. Bet those tickets for the OU/OSU game on Nov 24 are going to be impossible to come by if this keeps up.

roger — September 22, 2012 at 5:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


One of my favorite bands - got to see them once, in Philly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fQllI...

roger — September 22, 2012 at 8:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal




mxfun118 — September 22, 2012 at 4:35 p.m.

You meant Republican'ts, didn't you? I might be old but I still have my dingleberries.

You're still a wet behind the ears punk kid that should listen more than speak for at least until you are 21. If that offends you, too bad. I wish someone would have given me that advise when I was young.

hawkeye — September 22, 2012 at 9:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh, and BTW, this is an open forum and we post whatever we want to share. You want local, current events, post something and ask for feedback. OR, you could always go to the FB side.

hawkeye — September 22, 2012 at 9:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yeah!!!

roger — September 22, 2012 at 9:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal



roger — September 22, 2012 at 9:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal



goldenoldie — September 22, 2012 at 8:06 a.m.

Have to slow down on the basement since I have work issues occupying my time, and I am enrolled in a college class that take a lot of my time. Will be checking in and chiming in as I am able. Wouldn't want anyone to get too comfortable without me here thinking they may have succeeded in driving me away.

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 6:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 22, 2012 at 10:13 a.m.

You're right. Those things are socialist in nature. There are reasons for their existence, and I won't try to justify eliminating all of those.

As far as the programs related to the military, they may be socialist in nature, they are a necessity to have people in uniform when utilizing an all volunteer force. If we didn't offer benefits as incentives, we wouldn't have much luck finding volunteers. Then we would need conscripts. They would only be interested in doing their time and hanging up their boots. This would also mean we wouldn't have enough sticking around and gaining experience to become senior leaders.

My point is that the more we hand over to government control, the closer we get to Soviet socialism. This strips freedom. For a nation that cherishes freedom as much as we claim, this should be something we should consider,

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 6:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 22, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.

OR...

perhaps those undecided voters, in any state, have just chosen, as I have, when asked in a poll who they intend to vote for warrants the answer:

"None of your damned business"

We are entitled to a secret ballot. Some of us aren't blindly devoted to a party or candidate. Some don't feel they have to share their choice. Why should they? All it will mean is that a candidate will know if they need to work that area or not.

Why shouldn't a candidate get around to all areas? They are being selected to represent everyone, not just one state that is going to be a close decision.

All politicians are guilty in this regard. And Mr. Maher should concentrate more on the candidates ignoring the people in a place they have gauranteed support or given up on possibly winning those voters, and less on the voters who don't feel they have to respond to polls.

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 6:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Sunday reading that might not be for everyone...........

The New Yorker is one of my favorite magazines and my first choice to keep my brain busy when I face long flights across the country. I usually learn something from its contents. I think some of America's most talented contemporary writers contribute to it.

This week's edition brought me this gift. It is a long and historical perspective on the business of campaign consulting, which really began in 1933. I don't think it will appeal to everyone here, but it is meaty enough to motivate me to share with those who might be interested.

It is called, "The Lie Factory" by Jill Lapore.

Enjoy:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/09/24/120924fa_fact_lepore?currentPage=all

manthou — September 23, 2012 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 22, 2012 at 5:05 p.m.

The recall isn't exclusive to the Corps. Other services also recall separated members when needed.

And all service members pay for retirement. We pay with our time serving, and we are also tax payers, which is the source of the payments.

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 7:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — September 22, 2012 at 9:21 p.m.

Yes, advise to a younger hawkeye could have had a very positive effect. He may not have been so blindly devoted to the dems.

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 7:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DBW-*And Mr. Maher should concentrate more on..."*

Perhaps you shouldn't be so emotional concerning political comedy. If you wish to give Mr. Maher some career advice you most likely could contact him through his website.

Considering you live, eat, and breathe socialism while condemning programs which benefit the majority, perhaps you should take a look in your own backyard. It's all you know. It might explain your comment...*Well my response to everyone who sees a socialized program somewhere they like, then go there to live.* People join and remain in the service for many reasons. A structured socialized environment is one of them.

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


And speaking of backyards...

xm118 @ 4:35- You sound like a spoiled brat. My guess is it's been the opposite for you in life, and you've been deprived much through no fault of your own. When people display behavioral issues many times the problems are deep seeded, environmental and hereditary. Given some of your stated background, my guess is emotional/mental disorders have been prevalent in your lineage. Often times dementia/other disorders become predominant with time, but often appear in your age group (I'm guessing mid to late twenties) when family history of such are present.

Here's some info that might help you wrap your young influential mind around, and hopefully becomes a causation for seeking further guidance. We're rooting for you. It's not easy overcoming obstacles you can see, let alone those closest to you which seem inane. i.e."objects are closer than they appear in the mirror".

*We can pick our friends, but not our family.* Hope this helps get you started.

Complex Behavioral Disorders/Genetics

One approach to this problem assesses coinheritance of the trait or disease with specific genetic markers using simple pairs of relatives, *most often sibling pairs and their parents*. A candidate region containing potential vulnerability-enhancing genes is identified if affected siblings display specific gene markers more often than they should by *chance inheritance based on parental genotypes*. Modelling studies indicate that these methods have good power for detecting genes of substantial effect, but less power in identifying gene variants that account for much less than 5–10% of the variance in the population.

When neurobiological investigations identify a strong candidate gene, association testing can reveal if certain allelic variants of the gene are more common in affected than in unaffected individuals. As the molecular neurobiological underpinnings of complex behavioral disorders are better understood in humans and in animal models, the number of strong candidate genes will grow and increase the power of candidate gene searches. Testing markers at each of the 40,000–60,000 genes expressed in the brain can now be approached, especially comparing marker frequencies in pooled DNA samples from affected and from unaffected control individuals.

http://www.pnas.org/content/94/7/2785.full

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 8:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


'SNL' Presents g.o.b. Republican Tampons (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/23/snl-gob-republican-tampons-commercial-video_n_1907205.html

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou @ 7:26- Quite the parallel with yesterday's bigotry and "socialized health care" and todays!

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 9:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


And of local issues for those who really care to discuss them, and not just provide a pathway for flaming rhetoric alluding to such, great 'Press Talk'. Unable to speak to the substance of the write, some of the Right Wing FB comments speak to the political reality/vacuum which many live.

It's no wonder so many who "lean" right are reticent to speak of politicians who garner their support. Both locally and on the national scene.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/se...

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 10:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou and Nailingit --- This is also relevant in light of your recommended article from New York Mag today, Manthou. This is from yesterday's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/us/politics/ralph-reed-hopes-to-nudge-mitt-romney-to-a-victory.html?_r=0

I've already done my rant on Ralph Reed. David Madore is the Chairman of Washington Faith & Freedom Coalition. I know Nailingit read this when I sent it earlier but still very timely especially when combined with efforts & funding from Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, etc.

http://www.alternet.org/story/156141/religious_right%27s_ralph_reed_field-tests_plan_for_beating_obama/

langenthal — September 23, 2012 at 11:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit and Manthou --- This is from several days ago so you've probably read it. I check out the Comments too.

http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/right-wing-media-2012-9/

langenthal — September 23, 2012 at 11:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQou2W...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQC8Ez...

langenthal- Thought you would appreciate these two short vids. A few weeks ago I posted a few Pat Robertson crazy quotes after Romney propped up the old shyster on stage with him. I was highly criticized from a few self-professed Christians/evangelicals for stating Pat Robertson is a main stream voice for today's evangelical movement, which of course he definitely is.

These vids go to point. These guys have been lining their pockets so long off the gullible, most likely they have to check their bank statement to reaffirm what faith they represent.

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 11:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger @ 5:28- I don't use facebook anymore, I find it to be boring and redundant. It's baffled me of how the FAA gave very little time of notice to them at Pearson. How could have Pearson been left in the dark about it? Something is missing. I do wonder about the extreme noises in Downtown but then again I am used to the sounds down there. As well as the impact it will have in the local area.

mxfun118 — September 23, 2012 at 12:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yes, advise to a younger hawkeye could have had a very positive effect. He may not have been so blindly devoted to the dems.

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 7:33 a.m.

Are you kidding? Had I listened more to those around me I might have run away to Woodstock or at the least, Canada. I don't understand how you can pigeon hole me without knowing me. Being a Democrat is the ONLY logical way to go. My problem here is trying to figure out the contradiction going on inside YOUR head being a conservative inside and pretending to be progressive on the outside. I guess wearing the camo helps.

hawkeye — September 23, 2012 at 1:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawky- You're still old and remind me of Dirty Harry. If you weren't old you'd know a dingleberry is not what you think and it's a piece of doo stuck to the backside- You're old.

Nailin t i t- You can copy and paste. I already know that I am sick and demented so what's your point? Better a spoiled young brat than old.

Republican'ts are democrats in disguise.

mxfun118 — September 23, 2012 at 1:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hahaha nailingit....not that! My own typo hahaha

mxfun118 — September 23, 2012 at 1:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mxfun118 @ 1:26- Good to know. At first look I thought maybe I got your age wrong and our paths crossed some time ago. :) BTW growing older beats the alternative. Most of the time.

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 1:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mxfun118 — September 23, 2012 at 12:56 p.m.

First, that is the $64-whatever question; how can FAA give Pearson a two week notice that they intend to restrict the airspace they're using? There has to be an unknown piece to this puzzle. Seeing as how City of Vancouver owns Pearson, and considers it an important component of their "revitalization" planning, we ought to be learning more in the next day or so.

Anyone who lives downtown will need to get used to a LOT more noise if this goes through. My past experience (Phoenix and LA) is that you can't expect people to live and businesses to thrive under an airport flight path; this could kill a whole lot of plans.

As to the rest of what you say --

"I don't use facebook anymore, I find it to be boring and redundant." And the people who post here are all old geezers who need to take more Metamucil (except for Goldie, who you currently find relevant to the modern world).

About a week ago you told Hawkeye you're a theology student - perhaps Greek Orthodox? About a month ago you accused Goldie of preaching the same economics that got us in the mess we're in today. And most of your infrequent posts are attacks on someone or everyone. This doesn't add up to be a coherent picture - does it? What is your motivation?

roger — September 23, 2012 at 1:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 6:06 a.m.

Yeah...we wouldn't want people to think you'd allow that!!! You're input is needed here in the forum. BTW, I wish you success on your college class.

danabwoodley — September 23, 2012 at 6:28 a.m.

How can they determine the decision of voters who haven't had the chance to vote yet? And those telephone pollsters...calling from the same number 10 or 12 times in one day??? You'd better believe it when I tell them "It's none of your Damned Business!!!" I've asked them to stop calling...they still call. They are obnoxious, irritating and haven't a clue what "DO NOT CALL THIS NUMBER AGAIN" means! Honestly Dana, I'm beginning to wonder just how many of the people who have given in to answer the questions haven't told the truth???

As I'd said before on September 19, 2012 at 7:15 p.m. *"Polls are collected from a target group and are inaccurate information sources. Anybody can say one thing and believe another. Only the election will show the actual results."*

goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 1:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh my Lord...

You guys who find mxfun118's posts to be something it is not....you apparently don't fathom the concept of satire fueled by sarcasm. Might I suggest some time away from your keyboards???

Hmm...come to think of it, maybe mx IS spot on!!!

Sheesh!!!

goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 2:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye September 22, 2012 at 9:21 p.m. They probably did, only you were to smart at that age to listen to'em. lol. We were all pretty smart at that age, including that 19 year old insulting, smart mouthed girl that was on here a while back. Age and life experience seams to have done wonders for some of us though.

rincon1 — September 23, 2012 at 2:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Age and life experience seams to have done wonders for some of us though."

Yeah, a select few of us, lol.

...

Okay...now I'm reeeeeally laughing at the captcha selection I just received..."The manalyze" -
slang for analyzing The Man, perhaps??? Too funny that this would show up right now, lololololol.

goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 2:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — September 23, 2012 at 1:47 p.m.

Might I chime in for a second regarding the Pearson Airfield and a possible answer to that $64 question???

All one has to do is take a little peek eastward...towards Mill Plain where the Evergreen Airport used to stand and what is happening to that property. Bet you can guess as to what I'm about to say??? Yeah, it's all in the money and if the city owns the property, they're already sizing up what could go into that rather expansive piece of prime commercial property.

goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 2:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Nl6mo6gv3s

...and speaking of kids and genetics..

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 2:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Entertaining vid, nailingit. What can be unnerving about such a video from one very humorous group of slapstick comedy writers is...

They're usually spot on with the messages they share with the public.

Scary thought...eh!

goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 2:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger and mxfun, I agree with your take on Pearson. As to the noise, there might be a little more noise but most of the landings are on 10R and the departchers are on 10L.

rincon1 — September 23, 2012 at 2:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Something in The Columbian hard copy that caught my attention in the Washington DC Roll Call.

The Repubs put up HR 6429, which was to reserve 55,000 permanent visas annually for foreigners receiving advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics from US colleges. No idea why this required a 2/3 majority vote, but it failed to attain it. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said it just replaced one program with another, taking the visas from the Diversity Visa program. Interesting.

As it turns out, the Diversity Visa program is directed to people from countries with low rates of emigration to the US. Among other requirements, you have to have a high school education or its equivalent, or two years of work experience within the past five years in an occupation requiring at least two years' training or experience. http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1322.html

Your occupation has to register something called an SVP of 7.0 or higher to qualify. Out of curiosity I went to the webpage where one can see if their training/work experience qualifies. Interesting. http://www.onetonline.org/find/family A newspaper editor just barely makes the cut (SVP 7.0 to <8). Clergymen get an 8.0. Maids register as < 4.0. Hmmm.... No wonder we have all these problems with rich folks hiring illegal immigrants to be their maids - they can't get in legally!!! They don't need editors and preachers - they need someone to clean up after them!!!

Anyhow - to get serious - the Repubs say their bill was aimed at graduates of our colleges - keep them here, rather than forcing them to return home and work for our competitors in the international marketplace. The Dems appear more interested in ensuring a proper demographic mix, with skills being secondary. (Also, in many fields that foreign training and work experience barely counts; you have to get retrained and certified here.)

On the surface, I'd say the Dems are the obstructionists with this one.

roger — September 23, 2012 at 2:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


rincon1- *including that 19 year old insulting, smart mouthed girl that was on here a while back*

Assuming you are refering to frobert's daughter Genevieve. (given her age and your previous discussion with her) I take exception with your statement. Gen was/is one of my favorite posters on this forum. She provided a window as to how a faction of our youth view society today. Extremely smart, determined, opinionated and a great sense of humor. I wish she would start posting again.

We didn't always agree, but I respected her posts and learned something from them. I've noticed many of your posts involve taking opaque cheap shots at posters/opinions that don't line up with yours. All well and good I suppose in this arena of speaking one's mind without consequence, but may I suggest you offer something a bit more substantive than just piggybacking comments to swipe at folks.

Again, what you say is your own business, you just might try to keep it a little classier (like me?? :), that's all. But I suppose I'm one of those who provide "all the hateful, insulting and snide remarks" and are "narrow minded, one sided and bias".

Not trying to pick a forum fight with someone I've had no direct beef with, but I found your shot at Genevieve to be a bit uncalled for.

Peace to you and I'm not trying to stir things up. I get enough crap headed my way (deservingly or not :))) to last some time.

amen

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 3:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Man, the pot kettle comments are on the way! :) Again, all meant with good intent. Peace.

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 3:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 3:26 p.m.

Very nice post, I will try to make sure Gen reads it. I didn't feel I was in a position to comment.

frobert — September 23, 2012 at 3:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And speaking of things that are substantive, important, meaningful and critical to our well being...has anyone else noticed the striking resemblance between Paul Ryan & Howard Stern?

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 3:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks frobert. Now we can go back to ripping each others throats out. :)

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 3:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 2:27 p.m.

Goldie, this is different than Evergreen. Vancouver wants Pearson operational, and has gotten it on a couple of national registers to try to keep it running. Most of the business aspects of this appear to be geared toward tourism - flights around Mount Hood, for example. The business plan is a few years old (circa 2005), but they were talking about expanding to the vacant fields at the NE end of the airfield. I remember reading somewhere that its proximity would be used to help attract businesses to the Waterfront project area - whether this was strictly recreational or if they envisioned lengthening the field to accommodate commuter hops, I can't say. http://www.cityofvancouver.us/pearson.asp?menuid=10465&submenuID;=19252

roger — September 23, 2012 at 3:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


rincon1 — September 23, 2012 at 2:43 p.m.

There's a guy named Paul Speer who posted several times to the article on this. He's a pilot, is leader of some group at Pearson, and was part of a Portland PDX noise abatement study team a couple of years back. He's of the opinion the noise problem will carry to Hazel Dell and beyond.

Me - I'm just basing my opinion on being at Esther Shore one day when a plane was taking off from PDX and passing almost overhead - it was somewhere between the park and the river. It was loud enough that we all stopped talking; we couldn't understand what anyone was saying. If this becomes the normal takeoff flight path - then I'm betting there will be more than a little more noise. And I certainly wouldn't want to live in that area.

roger — September 23, 2012 at 4 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Latest exchange between Nails and Fro reminds me of an old Mad magazine piece. No one picks on my little brother. (Whack) Except me.

I suspect that if young Gen reads rincon's comment and deigns an answer - it will be highly entertaining.

roger — September 23, 2012 at 4:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


But who determines when that "matter of degrees" makes a difference? -- roger — September 22, 2012 at 5:05 p.m.

In the above mentioned U.S. v. Butler; SCOTUS wrote that “the people’s representatives” decide what the “general welfare” is. I.e. Article 1, section 8.

Many of us believe that the idea of general welfare has been transformed into the idea of a welfare state, by the Left. Talk about semantics.

There are some good comments on FB on Lairds column on this subject. More or less. “Conflating” different things is one relevant word. To paraphrase: There is a difference between public monies spent on public infrastructures for the public use, and that of taking from one to give to another as in that of a welfare state. R. Reagan supported the notion of a safety net, as I do , as do many, but at some time the notion of a safety net becomes contorted with that of cradle to grave welfare state.

I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment that “The only thing suppressed under socialism is capitalism”.

You seem to make an assumption that capitalism is bad. I believe that Capitalism is but one manifestation of personal liberty and is the most defining deference between the Left of the failed Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, The Eastern block countries, Cuba and others; and the West.

I won’t speak for Dana, but I think he was trying to say that, like the Law of Gravity, sometimes, there’s just no way to turn back. I prefer to call it collectivist, rather than split hairs over communist, socialist, progressive. It’s all about collectivism at the government level. Bodies, boards, panels and commissions of people making all manner of decision for what should be private decisions. And yeah, it is a suppression of personal liberties, See above. All roads lead to Rome. The USSR spent 70 years dealing with that, the rest of us are dealing with that right now. And I have given examples of what I consider to be totalitarian government, by the Left, in this country.

BTW, I think you’ll find, that the Union of Soviet Socialist States, was socialist. A point, with some exceptions, that the Left has tried to downplay for years. As you mentioned yourself, the ism’s are only partially fulfilled.

kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 4:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou,

Noam Chomsky referenced this statement by Walter Lippmann in one of his books - seems to parallel what Upton Sinclair ran into.

"That the manufacture of consent is capable of great refinements no one, I think, denies. The process by which public opinions arise is certainly no less intricate than it has appeared in these pages, and the opportunities for manipulation open to anyone who understands the process are plain enough. . . . [a]s a result of psychological research, coupled with the modern means of communication, the practice of democracy has turned a corner." — Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion (1922)

Lippmann's point was that the world had become too complex for the common man to understand - that "analysts" decided what was important and how to phrase it, who in turn fed this to the people with the capability of swaying public opinion (the politicians) - they tell us what to believe, and it becomes our truth.

There's an interesting modern day example - Brendan Steinhauser, of Freedom Works, has quoted Samuel Adams as saying "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds." Websites run by Tea Party groups and other conservative organizations like to reference this, and the practice is more than evident in the repetitious statements that we hear on TV and radio news opinion programs and on the internet. One problem - scholars say there is no record that Sam Adams ever wrote or said it.

(And before the Cons jump me - yes, the Libs are also masters of this - Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow come to mind. Hmmm... and perhaps our own forum member Nails should be included?) (And I figure Nails won't take offense, what with me placing him in the same league as Rachel!!)

roger — September 23, 2012 at 5:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal



"BTW, I think you’ll find, that the Union of Soviet Socialist States, was socialist. A point, with some exceptions, that the Left has tried to downplay for years. As you mentioned yourself, the ism’s are only partially fulfilled. "

If you can't see the friggin' differences, I'm not even gonna try to explain them to ya'. Comparing American socialism to a totalitarian regime is out of sight ridiculous. Do better-you're conservative friends and their similiar outdated libertarian friends need all the help they can get. That 3rd party nonsense, however righteous, ain't gonna happen. Best to ya, however. Some great ideas, but,..... You've (we) have been bought and sold out. I can't seem to get my head around what little representative government we have left. Luv your Libertarian stand, but.....it ain't gonna happen.

mrd — September 23, 2012 at 6:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — September 23, 2012 at 6:12 p.m.

I'm not sure if this is where Laura Ingraham would like the conversation to go, but after reading the AP article in today's Columbian that starts --
"A frustrated Congress quit Washington on Saturday with at least one hope — that the stark choice in the election ahead will give lawmakers clarity about what Americans want from their government. They desperately need some direction."

This article suggests the day of the neoCon is drawing to a close. The Repubs will ave to sweep the elections to gain affirmation of their agenda. If the most likely scenario occurs - that the status quo is maintained (Rep House and Dem Pres and Senate), then the Repubs are going to have to accept Pres Obama's reelection as a mandate to move to the middle and start working together.

We'll see. And I'm not holding my breath.

roger — September 23, 2012 at 7:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai...

I don't think the actual term they like to use here is "Socialist." Too starchy...too stuffy. I believe they like to label the term as "Social Democracy." It sounds so much friendlier. So user friendly (cough, choke, choke)...so Uhmerikhan...er, Umeri*con*...hmm, well doggone it! You know how it goes with the labels, nowadays.

It's a funnn-damental thing.

goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 7:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 4:16 p.m.

And I'll repeat -- Under communism "to each according to need" applies. Under socialism, this becomes "to each according to input".

This doesn't mean those who are in need get ignored, and it doesn't mean everyone contributes the same to the common good. What it does mean is that under socialism, hard work and a bit of luck will let someone get ahead in the game.

There was at least one point in time the USSR strayed from communism - when Stalin relented and allowed collectives that raised more than required to keep the excess and sell it (for a time anyhow, until this no longer suited their needs). But to say this made them a socialist state is a stretch - about as much as saying the "National Socialism" of Hitler's Germany was truly socialism.

roger — September 23, 2012 at 7:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The point is one of escalation mrd. Ever heard of the frog in the pan of slowly boiling water. And if you can't even see what's the friggin' gone on since the FDR years, then I'm not even gonna try to explain it to ya'.

kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 7:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie,

Euphemism may be a good word.

Self-delusion may be another.

kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 7:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit, I read your response and I found it ,in my opinion, to be very well stated and respectful. No name calling, insulting remarks ect. I appreciate your take on on my rant. My opinion of the one I did not name still stands. She has a very offensive mouth for anyone who says something she disagrees with. Your answer to me proves you, or anyone, can get your point across very well without the low class rhetoric.

rincon1 — September 23, 2012 at 7:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I see. Just who determines "to each according to input" Roger?

kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 7:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger @ 5:51- I had a much too lengthy narrative ready to send and my internet connection crapped out for a second. I hate it when that happens, but the upside is we were all spared my lengthy narrative. I'll just say there is a difference between talking points and facts. Be careful drawing parallels between those that perpetuate falsehoods i.e. Freedom Works and those who base their talking points on facts i.e. Maddow (feel free to cite examples where I'm wrong with Maddow). Much easier to source information today than it was in Lipmann's time.

As for *(And I figure Nails won't take offense, what with me placing him in the same league as Rachel!!)* We both know I'm not anywhere close to being worthy to carry her IPad! :)

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 7:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, I don't see how Hazeldell could be negatively affected by noise as any planes passing over are on the down wind leg and are not very low, also their engines are throttled back quite a bit. Military planes are very noisy but the commercial planes are a lot quieter than they used to be. Maybe after 70 years my hearing is getting a little dull.

rincon1 — September 23, 2012 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal


rincon1- Your response is appreciated and welcomed. I think people are kinda like art.

I can study, get delirious and nearly brought to tears over a Rembrandt for hours (I have been blessed with a timeless viewing of the Night Watch among others) or a Caravaggio, yet gloss over a Picasso or a Matisse. It's all a matter of taste and appreciation. Although I've never met "the one I did not name", I think there's a lot going on that's under appreciated.

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 8:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"The point is one of escalation mrd. Ever heard of the frog in the pan of slowly boiling water. And if you can't even see what's the friggin' gone on since the FDR years, then I'm not even gonna try to explain it to ya'."

FDR?? Isn't that like 80 years ago? If you think there's a trajectory there you can change, well, knock yourself out! Realistically, it ain't gonna happen. There are many of libertarian leanings, constitutional scholars and experts, that feel they have some idea of a fix for a system out of control. ZZZZZzzzzzz.....I think I'll go watch another rerun of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-ah, the good old days.

mrd — September 23, 2012 at 8:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 8:35 p.m.

I suppose someone is going to call me a know-it-all, but I like your taste in Caravaggio.

While the guy seemed to have a thing for the macabre, and I don't really like his Medusa,or David with the head of Goliath, he was very talented. I'm hardly an art expert, but when you see something you like... you know it, and I've liked Caravaggio, well his art anyway, ever since I discovered him 30 years ago.

Seems to me, he was accused of killing a man or something, but never convicted.

kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 8:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_d- I'm in the same category of "when you see something you like... you know it" also, and no expert on this end either. Just a more than passing appreciation of artistic genius such as Caravaggio, Rembrandt & others. I've always been amazed with those who can put a brush to canvas and create such wonders. I do appreciate the macabre in some of Caravaggio's art though. It's that dark & violent work (among others), with many times a religious undertone I can find intriguing. It takes one to a place that's fascinating, but you know you shouldn't stay there too long.

nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 9:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 23, 2012 at 8:45 p.m

Considering that FDR was elected in 1932, but didn’t take office until 1933, I guess that’s 79 years. But since he served for 12 years, that makes it more like 67 years.

Calm down mrd.

The whole thing is about collectivism. And degrees thereof.

As far as I’m concerned, most of politics boils down to one’s personal experience which forms one's perspective. Except for those big thinkers who never had any personal experience.

No one has ever walked in another’s shoes. There’s this side of the fence, and then there’s the other side of the fence.

As far as I’m concerned that collectivist side of the fence has caused more mayhem than anything else. But that’s my idea.

Goodnight mrd.

kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 9:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Roger, I was just speaking my mind. Anytime, anywhere, someone's opinion is going to be considered an attack. Even when I am sarcastic. And I could really give a rats a** what anyone thinks. But if you talk local, you got my attention. As for FAA, I bet the notifications were lost in "translation" or they will say "did you see the twitter feed? We tagged you in it." Or someone local wasn't doing their job right. Which is that a shock? ummm no

~Don't forget now, I'm just a punk (who rides dirtbikes, who races my car the time and wants the po po to chase us <- thought I'd add that in- fits the typical 20's spoiled brat).

Nailingit.....Nobody likes you when your twenty-three, And I'm still amused by TV-shows, What the he** is A.D.D, What's my age again? :P

mxfun118 — September 23, 2012 at 9:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*No one has ever walked in another’s shoes. There’s this side of the fence, and then there’s the other side of the fence.*
kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 9:30 p.m

oh contraire, mon ami.

God has this impish inclincation to put one into the very "shoes" of those he derides as a lesson.

be careful what you judge: God just might give you an object lesson in compassion.

DeeLittle — September 24, 2012 at 12:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 23, 2012 at 8:12 a.m.

To say that the military is a socilist society is to say that we do not earn our pay. That would also mean that every member, regardless of rank or experience would be earning exactly the same.

As was pointed out, the benefits we recieve are a part of our compensation package. Same as what a private employer would provide.

And as far as Mr. Maher goes, if I am not to take him seriously in his political commentary, why do you quote him as though he speaks gospel?

danabwoodley — September 24, 2012 at 1:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — September 23, 2012 at 1:13 p.m.

I am curious what about me makes you think I am progressive.

And honestly, no party is a logical way to go. The hardliners that only see the letter next to a persons name to decide if they support or not sicken me, and that is on both sides of the spectrum.

danabwoodley — September 24, 2012 at 1:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — September 23, 2012 at 1:55 p.m.

I also think that reporting on polls skews election results. You have a portion of the population that will make their voting decision based upon polls, if for no other reason than to be able to say that they voted for the winning candidate. Not a great number, but some.

danabwoodley — September 24, 2012 at 1:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — September 23, 2012 at 4:16 p.m.

I am not always capable of putting forth the words that I need to get my point across, especially when I am trying to get through a lot in a short amount of time. You were able to put it quite well.

I do not agree, however, that you cannot go back. You can. It is possible. The problem being, the longer you allow a condition to exist, the more difficult it will be to reverse it.

When European countries try to pass reforms that put more of the onus on the individual citizen, and less responsibility of the government, they are met with strong, and sometimes violent, protests.

danabwoodley — September 24, 2012 at 1:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — September 23, 2012 at 6:44 p.m.

Each time we socialize a program, we get a step closer to a totalitarian government. You say we have been bought and sold? Perhaps. I do believe we can change what has become the status quo.

The most difficult part in doing so is to stir up the people who have given up on the ability to induce change. The people who won't vote because they are convinced that their voice won't make a difference. I believe that enough are out there, that if we can rally them, we can see positive changes to how the political game is played.

danabwoodley — September 24, 2012 at 1:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***larry elder, with references***

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/newt-clinton-and-the-balanced-budget/

*When Bill Clinton spoke at the Democratic National Convention, he took credit for balancing the budget. That Clinton basked in his achievement, of course, surprises no one. Nor is it surprising the media failed to remind people of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and his role in pulling this off.*
*Still, at one time, the media, without reservation, gave credit to Gingrich for making a balanced budget a priority – and for pushing Clinton toward the center to achieve it. Back then, even when writing negatively about Gingrich, the major media routinely credited Gingrich with pushing a recalcitrant President Clinton toward a balanced budget.*

*Let’s go to the videotape:
In 1995, Time magazine named Newt Gingrich “Man of the Year”: “Leaders make things possible. Exceptional leaders make them inevitable. Newt Gingrich belongs in the category of the exceptional. All year – ruthlessly, brilliantly, obnoxiously – he worked at hammering together inevitabilities: a balanced federal budget, for one. … Today, because of Gingrich (emphasis added), the question is not whether a balanced-budget plan will come to pass but when.
“Gingrich has changed the center of gravity. From Franklin Roosevelt onward, Americans came to accept the federal government as the solution to problems, a vast parental presence. … Newt Gingrich wants to reverse the physics, make American government truly centrifugal, with power flowing out of Washington, devolving to the states.”
And what of Clinton’s role?
Time continues: “Having organized an insurrectionist crew in the House, Gingrich seized the initiative from a temporarily passive president (emphasis added) and steered the country onto a heading that the speaker accurately proclaimed to be revolutionary.”*

*In 1996, Newsweek’s Evan Thomas wrote: “More than anything else, Gingrich wanted to dismantle the ‘bureaucratic welfare state.’ To do that, he understood, he had to attack Congress’ addiction to deficit spending. When he assumed power in 1995, he consulted CEOs who had downsized their own companies; they advised him to stake out bold positions and force others to follow. … Under Gingrich the House passed a budget that truly restrained the growth of federal spending.”*

DeeLittle — September 24, 2012 at 2:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**cont'd**

*In 1998, Time’s Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy wrote: “If Clinton has always had a gift for turning weakness into opportunity, Gingrich has a gift for turning opportunity into rubble. Newt was the one who made unbalanced budgets a thing of the past, but it was Clinton who somehow got credit for it (emphasis added), rode to re-election (and) hauled his own party toward a more sensible center. … Voters might have retired Clinton in 1996 for moving too far to the left (emphasis added) had Gingrich not come along and yanked the whole enterprise too far to the right.”*

*Even the current Bill Clinton biography entry in the New York Times reads: “Mr. Clinton sought to remake a once-broken Democratic Party in a more centrist mold. … Part of Mr. Clinton’s centrism came out of necessity (emphasis added). After the attempt to reform the health-care system, led by his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, foundered, Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress in 1994, ending four decades of control of the House.”*

*But collective amnesia apparently set in, and many in the media no longer give Gingrich the credit they once did.*

*About Clinton’s speech at the Democratic convention, the Los Angeles Times, for example, wrote: “Clinton’s endorsement was meant to signal a ‘good economy seal of approval’ for Obama, a promise that Obama’s policies will bring back the peace and prosperity of the 1990s, when a booming economy created millions of jobs, stocks soared and a flood of tax revenues helped balance the federal budget for the first time in a generation. … Clinton, who served from 1993 to 2001, came into office at the end of a recession (emphasis added) and is credited by some for helping the nation achieve a budget surplus. With millions still out of work and trillion-dollar deficits sending the national debt soaring, Obama is looking for Clinton to vouch for his approach.*

*“Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota said that Clinton has ‘enormous credibility’ with voters – and not just Democrats – because of his handling of the economy and the national debt. He ‘knows how to explain difficult economic ideas in a way that everyone can relate to, not just in a historical context, but in a way that really touches people,’ she said. ‘People trust him on economic issues, and he’s an important person to discuss how we got where we are and what is the choice we need to make between two different directions.’”*

*The recession ended 22 months before Clinton took office. Gross domestic product growth the quarter before Clinton took over was a snappy 4.2 percent. And the lengthy Times article makes no mention of Gingrich or the Republican Congress of the ’90s.*

it's the nature of the beast to ignore reality.

DeeLittle — September 24, 2012 at 2:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mxfun118 — September 23, 2012 at 9:54 p.m. -- "~Don't forget now, I'm just a punk (who rides dirtbikes, who races my car the time and wants the po po to chase us <- thought I'd add that in- fits the typical 20's spoiled brat)."

OK - And I gather you missed the discussion some of us old fogies had a while back - racing cars and motorcycles. In my 20s I had a '70 Duster 340 that used to hold its own against the bigger muscle cars - Running I80 in central PA, and occasionally having to floor it to the next exit and then do some E&E; on back roads to lose Statie.

Anyhow, we all get old and boring. (Though we prefer to call this growing up.)

roger — September 24, 2012 at 6:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — September 24, 2012 at 12:23 a.m.

Excellent.

While I stand by my own comments,you have added an additional dimension which I wholely agree with.

"There but for the grace of God go I". Just the same, there is voluntary and there is mandatory.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 8:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Clinton sent congress a budget proposal a **record 5 times** . Gingrich held Clinton's feet to the fire until Gingrich and the Republican lead house finally got a budget they could live with. Yet Clinton takes the credit.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 8:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DBW- *To say that the military is a socilist society is to say that we do not earn our pay.*

No it doesn't.

*That would also mean that every member, regardless of rank or experience would be earning exactly the same.*

No it doesn't.

*why do you quote him as though he speaks gospel?*

No it doesn't. ;)

Given who you work for, ask some of your bros about life in Germany.

"What we have here is a failure to communicate."

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 9:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 9:07 a.m

One of your very earliest comments nail, was that you spent seven years working in Germany and deserved a medal for having been able to work with the Germans for that long. Do you remember that? I sure do. Am I wrong?

No disrepect to anyone, certainly this country has its supporters and detractors. But they have a certain reputation ... for regimentation.

Care to comment.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 9:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_d- *Bias taints one’s view. And extreme bias taints one’s view extremely.*

*Excellent.*

*While I stand by my own comments,you have added an additional dimension which I wholely agree with.*

What happened? wnd website is one of the most ridiculous conspiracy theory sites on the net. And that's saying something. A certain poster just loves this conspiracy stuff. Not trying to start a pissing match, but you do seem to glom on to anything that supports your views. When I see a nutjob site like wnd it's not worth the time to fact check. As usual, truth mixed with fiction mixed with opinion. It's the bait many conspiracy theorists swallow, hook, line and sinker.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/wnd_joseph_farah.php

As for your germany statement, I don't recall anything about a medal. :)) But commented on the work ethic of local nationals I dealt with as being sub par.

My comment to DBW was pointing to his assumption that everyone earns equal pay in a socialistic society. Just not so, not even close.

When I worked in Germany I was subjected to SOFA. luvit or a German citizen would be a better one for intricate details on Germany's standard of living, taxation, business ownership, etc. from a perspective relating to personal experience.

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I just saw a SNL clip on Andrea Mitchell's show.

*How has Romney paid such a low income tax rate all these years? He claims 47% of Americans as dependents!*

Now that's funny!

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 10:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 9:57 a.m.

My dear nailingit,

My comment to Dee of “excellent”, was on her 12:23 post, over her comment about walking in others shoes. In which she had no link to wnd or anything else.

My comments on Gingrich and Clinton, were based on my own knowledge on the subject of Gingrich, Clinton and the “balanced budget”, and had nothing to do with Dee’s link.

I think you may have confused and misread my two separate posts.

Considering how some of you have linked to mother jones, think progress, salon and all the rest, to belittle other’s links becomes the pot and the kettle thing. Huffington post, IMO, is questionable at best. OK, OK. I think it’s a Leftist rag, but that’s my opinion.

I always thought that you meant that German’s were difficult to work with. My mistake. Now…since you have indicated that Germany is a socialistic society, and since you wrote that “But commented on the work ethic of local nationals I dealt with as being sub par.” I’m wondering if you see any correlation between the two.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 10:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*My dear nailingit,*

And you are dear to me as well. :)

*I think you may have confused and misread my two separate posts.*

If so, my bad. My apologies.

*Considering how some of you have linked to mother jones, think progress, salon and all the rest, to belittle other’s links becomes the pot and the kettle thing.*

Not even close. It's better to point out mistruth's or flaws in a particular article than demonize the entire publication. (with the exception of conspiracy rags like wnd, National Enquirer, Cracked mag :) and some others that are overt in their subversion of facts/truths) Forbes, WJS and others have printed in my view some pretty outlandish stuff, but I will still fact check and reference them, knowing overall they are respected, somewhat mainstream and *tend* to be factually based. So many are charging fees for their usage, variety can be somewhat limited if not subscribing.

*I always thought that you meant that German’s were difficult to work with. My mistake.*

*But commented on the work ethic of local nationals I dealt with as being sub par.” I’m wondering if you see any correlation between the two.*

No mistake. I might have alluded to such. Sometimes it's difficult to provide nuance in conversation on a forum. Being the liberal I am, I'm reluctant to stigmatize any large group of people based on my limited experiences. Although in my bubble, I had quite a few situations which supported this. Overall I did find Germans to be innately "regimented" as you stated.

In our Capitalist society I'm sure we both have encountered more than our share of sub par performance, both in our careers and services we utilize.

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 11:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail,

HA.

HAHAHA!

Laughing. laughing out loud like a real BIG BELLY LAUGH!

HA!

Nailingit says: "I'm reluctant to stigmatize any large group of people based on my limited experiences."

Like Republicans and Christians. How's about those Mormons? Do you know what a large percentage of the population you're talking about?

AH.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Look at your screen nail. Now visualize a guy who's...ahahahah...laughing so hard it hurts.

HAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


AHHH...HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

Someone...ahahahahah...please pass the kleenex.....AHHHHHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

OMG!!!!!

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 11:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Relax kn_d- If your condition continues perhaps some Ipecac should help resolve.

Obviously you have missed the hypocrisy and/or changing ideology aspects to my posts referring to said groups.

Happy to know my post elicited such raw emotion! :)) Everyone needs a good laugh once in awhile.

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 12:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2FT4FprxDg

Yes...it's time once again for...

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 12:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


A lot of pedophilia in the Catholic church has been revealed, as have there been revealed incidents of pedophilia in the public education schools. Almost on a daily basis. You have advocated for the dissolution of the Catholic church. I guess the Federal government is supposed to do that. Sounds rather totalitarian to me. So I guess public education schools should also be ended.

You have repeatedly advocated for banning the Republican Party. Again, that sounds rather totalitarian to me. Changing ideology? Right, I guess that’s why so many left the Democrats to become Republicans. I think Reagan said something like “I didn’t leave the Democratic party, the Democratic party left me”.

Just what hypocrisy or changing ideology do you see in the Mormons? Far as I can see, they disowned polygamy a while back. Considering your criticism of Romney’s grandfather, that should be a welcome change in your mind.

Nailingit says:

> Obviously you have missed the hypocrisy and/or changing ideology aspects to my posts referring to said groups. -- nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 12:06 p.m

Naw, I don't think so. I think it must be something else.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 12:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*You have advocated for the dissolution of the Catholic church. I guess the Federal government is supposed to do that.*

Not the Feds, Catholics are doing a fine job in and of themselves.

*You have repeatedly advocated for banning the Republican Party.*

Really? Will you source that? What I have said is the Republican party as we know it is in the throws of self-immolation. That the party as we know it today will no longer exist. Call it advocation if you will. I call it what we are experiencing today.

*Just what hypocrisy or changing ideology do you see in the Mormons?*

To name one, the allowance of blacks in the Priesthood based on "revelation", rather than buckling to societal pressure at the time.

*Considering your criticism of Romney’s grandfather,*

Please source your accusation. Your writes are starting to resemble wnd website criteria. :))

*I think it must be something else.*

Whatever it is, it seems predisposed to errors in judgement and errant in facts.

Slow day?

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Whatever it is, it seems predisposed to errors in judgement and errant in facts.*

Just to be clear, that would be your summation in portraying what I've said. Not really getting your point in all of this. To discredit? Pass the time? Expose what you believe to be hypocrisy?

I would think after awhile, after laying so many of your unfounded statements to rest, doesn't it become nothing less than an exercise in futility on your part?

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:07 p.m

I'm pretty sure of myself nail. But I really don't want to take the time to go back through all of your voluminous writes.

To suggest that you have not advocated for the banning of the Republican Party is just ludicrous.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 1:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*But I really don't want to take the time to go back through all of your voluminous writes.*

I don't blame you. It would give me more than a headache!

Banning? By whom? Again you're wrong. Advocating the internal dissolution of such is something altogether different than banning.

Knowing how much you appreciate my cut & paste dictionary definitions, I'll oblige! :)

**futility - definition**

NOUN [UNCOUNTABLE] /fjuːˈtɪləti/
a lack of purpose, importance, or effectiveness
His efforts were accompanied by a sense of futility and doubt.
Thesaurus entry for this meaning of futility
PHRASE

an exercise in futility
a useless action that cannot succeed

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/futility

It is good to have a civil discussion with you. Although art/music is less tiresome. :))

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:34 p.m

You're a good sport nail. Even when you know your wrong:)

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 1:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Even when you know your wrong:)*

Could you source that? :)))

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:45 p.m -- nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 1:45 p.m.

Why, yes I can:

Nailingit: Month and day:(fill in blank), Year: (fill in blank), at: (fill in blank).

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 1:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


small places, small mind, spelling teacher at best.

soapbox4u — September 24, 2012 at 2:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**How Romney Packed The Univision Forum**

Tense moments as the campaign demands to bus in supporters and to retape an introduction. “A little bit of disrespect,” complains Univision's Salinas.

But after exhausting the few conservative groups on campus, the Romney camp realized there weren't enough sympathetic students to fill the stands on their night — so they told the network and university that if they weren't given an exemption to the students-only rule, they might have to "reschedule."

The organizers relented. One Democrat with ties to the Obama campaign noted that Rudy Fernandez, the university official charged with coordinating the forums, is a member of Romney's Hispanic steering committee. Fernandez did not respond to BuzzFeed's questions about whether he gave preferential treatment to Romney's campaign.

In any case, Romney's team was allowed to bus in rowdy activists from around southern Florida in order to fill the extra seats at their town hall.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/how-romney-packed-the-univision-forum

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 5:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not sure about the spelling thing, but I'm pretty sure you're an expert on small.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 5:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**What does a vote for Mitt mean?**

*In short, supporting the unprecedented concentration of wealth and power at the very top*

BY ROBERT REICH

Money means power. Concentrated wealth at the top means extraordinary power at the top. The reason Romney pays a rate of only 14 percent on $13 million of income in 2011 — a lower rate than many in the middle class — is because he exploits a loophole that allows private equity managers to treat their income as capital gains, taxed at only 15 percent.

And that loophole exists solely because private equity and hedge fund managers have so much political clout — as a result of their huge fortunes and the money they’ve donated to political candidates — that neither party will remove it.

In other words, everything America is learning about Mitt Romney — his tax returns, his years at Bain Capital, the video of his speech to high-end donors in which he belittles half of America, his gaffes, the budget policies he promotes — repeat and reenforce the same underlying reality.

So much wealth and power have accumulated at the top of America that our economy and our democracy are seriously threatened. Romney not only represents this problem. He is the living embodiment of it.

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/24/what_does_a_vote_for_mitt_mean/

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 5:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Robert Reich...???

Oh yeah, the professor, the American Political Economist, the author, the same man who was also *Secretary of Labor* under the *Clinton Administration???* *That* Robert Reich???

Well that beats all...Someone who supports the same guy as Clinton stating his "educated," unbiased(not) opinion??? Dang...this leans so far to the left, he's going to fall flat on his face one of these days!!!

Nailingit...do you honestly believe it's only the Mittster who engages in investments for which he'd have to pay a lower tax on his profits??? And do you honestly believe it's only those on the right who take advantage of such investments??? He's paid his taxes AND he's donated a generous portion of his profits to charities to boot.

Now of course, when George Soros does that...it's all good...right???

tsk, tsk. For shame, nails...for shame!!!

goldenoldie — September 24, 2012 at 6 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Moody's in a Mood**

The rating agencies are at it again. Moody's Investors Services says it's likely to downgrade U.S. government bonds if Congress and the White House don't reach a budget deal before we go over the so-called "fiscal cliff" on January 2, when $1.2 trillion in spending cuts and tax increases automatically go into effect.

Apparently the credit rating agencies can't decide which is more dangerous to the U.S. economy -- cutting the U.S. budget deficit too quickly, or not having a plan to cut it at all.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/moodys-in-a-mood_b_1878971.html

For those who would like to follow Mr. Reich on Twitter...

Follow Robert Reich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RBReich

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 6:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**“60 Minutes” Interviews Show Why Obama Is Winning**

Sunday night’s interviews with President Obama and Mitt Romney on “60 Minutes” were more interesting than the norm. Perhaps because they ran in succession, or perhaps because they amounted to a preview of next week’s first Presidential debate, they provided an illuminating portrait of the two candidates, and why one is leading the other. Obama performed his usual shtick as the last reasonable man in Washington, a dogged defender of the ordinary American. Romney, despite acknowledging his own slip-ups and making some substantive points on entitlement reform, came across as a heartless rich guy.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/09/60-minutes-interviews-show-why-obama-is-winning.html#ixzz27Rc5lvsx

nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 6:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 24, 2012 at 7:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


In part it's hysterical and seemingly unbelievable, then again it speaks to the Republican party tearing itself apart from the inside, while trying to usher in the ruination of America on the out. These nuts never quit. I hope the Dems put this guy front and center before the elections as an example. (although many states have begun early voting)

**Utah Set to Send Glenn Beck-Approved End Times Novelist to Congress**

Glenn Beck likes to say that he never endorses candidates—he just tells his followers how he feels about them. In Chris Stewart, the Republican nominee in Utah's 2nd Congressional District, Beck has found someone he feels pretty damn good about. "If he wasn't running, I'd be trying to convince him to work for me, to help me stay the course, strategize, and save the country," he said last winter, as Stewart's campaign was just getting off the ground. "I've actually tried to talk him out of running, because it's a lion's den in Washington."

But, Beck added, "I believe he's a Daniel."

Like the Old Testament figure who emerged unscathed from a pit of lions, Stewart—an Air Force pilot turned consultant turned end times novelist—is also a prophet of sorts, and his message is grim: "If we don't make some difficult decisions now, if we don't show the courage to do what we have to do to save our country, we won't make it for another 10 years," he said in February, in a campaign video that also served to promote a book he'd just published under Beck's imprint. But there was hope. "At critical times in our history…we literally had miracles where God intervened to save us," he said. Send me to Congress, Stewart seemed to imply, and it could happen again.

It's near certain that Stewart, running in a deep-red district in a deep-red state, will get his chance at fixing Washington next January. But his campaign has raised eyebrows in Utah, where Stewart has left a trail of furious **Republicans calling for an investigation into electoral dirty tricks and old hands in both parties predicting the second coming of Michele Bachmann. "From time to time, we get a certified nutcase," one former Utah Republican politician told me. "And Chris Stewart truly is a certified nutcase."**

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/chris-stewart-utah-republican

nailingit — September 25, 2012 at 8:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Brian Williams/Romney interview LIVE on MSNBC. Audience Q&A; to follow.

nailingit — September 25, 2012 at 8:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nails...the new forum has been up for a couple of days now, you know. that message could have been helpful for some on the current forum. Guess you didn't want it too publicized for a reason???

goldenoldie — September 25, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Not sure about the spelling thing, but I'm pretty sure you're an expert on small.

kn_dalai — September 24, 2012 at 5:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

Really? Your lady friends say you are the expert on small. But you always have your thumbs to use as backup!! KMA

soapbox4u — September 25, 2012 at 3:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u — September 25, 2012 at 3:44 p.m

I was almost ready to give you a "thumbs up" for your small comment, but then you had to go and ruin it with your KMA rudeness.

How come you don't actually ever say anything yourself.

kn_dalai — September 25, 2012 at 7:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login